Crusades Reconsidered - Not Imperalist, but a Response to Islamic Jingoism!!!

[GHook93]

First, I want to point out I am Jewish and Crusaders slaughered and forced many Jews to convert. The first crusaders were in Germany. They slaughter many Jews in a desire to get rid of all non-Christians.

During the 7th century Grand Warlord, Child Molester, Bigot, Assassin, Mass Murder Mohammad set his cult followers on a quest for world domination. Under his rule the Muslims took most of the middle east. After he died he ordered his followers to continue the Islamic Crusade - the Caliphate.

The Caliphate pushed on. They took the entire middle east, Persia, Turkey, Into the Balkans, Up to and into Mother Russia, Western Asia (Pakistan, India, Afganistan), the took North Africa and even pushed across the sea and took Malta, Cyprus, Siscely and Spain. They were FINALLY stopped by the Franks, but that didn't stop them.

During the 4th Caliphate - Ottoman Empire. The Muslims expanded further into Eastern Europe, including, but not limited to Bosnia, Albania and of course parts of Serbia. Islam was spread by the sword. Along the way they used ethnic cleansing (ever wonder why North Africa is composed nearly 100% of Arabs and not the ancestory black African people - the Islamic Crusaders), forced conversion, displacement of people and over course, pillaging and slavery.

The Muslim aggression hadn't stopped at the defeat by the Franks, the Muslims continued to attack Europe with eyes of conquest. In fact the reason Columbus went west to find a route to India, was because of the Islamic pirates and thefts!

Eventually Europe got strong and decided to kill some Islamic ass! The crusaders were brutal and many lacked morals, but their actions were motivated by Islamic aggression.

Articles: The Crusades Reconsidered

Shortly before he died in June 632 AD, Mohammed ordered Muslims to prepare to wage war against the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire.

Upon his death, Mohammed's successor, Abu Bakr, planned to fulfill those instructions. Plans were also made to conquer Zoroastrian Sassanid Persia.

This vainglorious troop of bandits should have been easily dispatched,

However. Persia and Byzantine Rome had just come out of a savagely vicious war which ended in 628 AD. Emperor Heraclius had finally imposed the total defeat over Persia that had eluded the earlier Roman Republic and the Caesars -- but Byzantine Rome, though victorious, was severely mauled. Persia was reduced to a state of anarchy; and forced to pay indemnities to Constantinople.

The Persian and Eastern Roman empires were attacked almost simultaneously around 633 AD, while both were still licking their wounds. So frightening were the Islamic advances that these former blood enemies made a sadly futile alliance. By 644, Persia fell anyway.

By 634 AD, Byzantine Palestine and Syria were being attacked. The Battle of Yarmouk in August 636 AD would see Eastern Roman forces beaten. Emperor Heraclius, the victorious warrior, a mere 8 years earlier, would have to sneak out back to Constantinople in a boat.

Farewell, a long farewell to Syria, my fair province. Thou art an infidel's (enemy's) now. Peace be with you, O' Syria -- what a beautiful land you will be for the enemy hands -- Emperor Heraclius, after the defeat at Yarmouk.

Roman-held Jerusalem was besieged in November 636 AD, and surrendered by the following April.

By 674 AD, the Muslims had taken Egypt and much of Anatolian Turkey, and were besieging Constantinople. The Byzantine Romans, unlike the Persians, still had some fight left and managed to lift the siege using Greek fire, a fearsome weapon similar to a flamethrower.

By 709 AD, all of Christian North Africa had fallen to Islam. Though it took the Muslims centuries, eventually all of Christianity was eliminated in the Maghreb.

In 711 AD, the Muslims invaded Spain, again taking advantage of weakness caused by internecine wars. It would be 781 years before Spain would be free. Among Islamic Andalusia's contributions to civilization were the demanded tribute of 100 white virgins every year to staff their harems. Every other contribution was plagiarized from other civilizations the Muslims had plundered.

By 732, the Muslims had advanced to central France, where they were finally repelled by Franks at the battle of Tours. Western Europe had been temporarily spared.

Sicily fell under Islamic rule for almost two centuries, until finally liberated by Norman Franks around 1091 AD.
According to tradition, Malta fell to Islam in 870 AD. Islam's contribution's to local culture was piracy. Malta became a staging point for predatory raids on Southern Europe.

After two centuries, Malta was finally retaken in 1091 AD.

Later on, historians would blame the Dark Ages on the Germanic Tribes, but the Goths and Vikings readily Christianized and embraced the higher civilization of the lands they conquered. The reality is that Islamic raiding is what produced the Dark Ages. Trade and the economy collapsed under the Muslim threat, plunging Europe into stagnation.

In 1095, after centuries of Muslim aggression, Pope Urban II finally had enough, and called Christians to war. He did so after the Byzantine Empire, now broken away from Roman Catholicism, appealed for fraternal help from the Western Christians to save them from Islam. After over 4 centuries of war with Islam, the Byzantines were on the verge of collapse. Most of Spain was still under Islamic tyranny. Malta and Sicily had only been recently freed.



One may condemn the atrocities of the Crusaders, but what infuriates the objective student of history is that the far greater crimes of Islam are ignored.

The Crusades was Christendom finally fighting back, not always honorably, but against a foe which had plunged Europe into darkness for centuries.

Instead we allowed our students to be brainwashed, and force fed an Islamic line that we have to feel guilty. The Muslims invaded Southern Europe, yet somehow we Westerners are labeled the imperialists.

Islamic aggression did not end with the Crusades.

The reason Columbus headed West was because the Muslims had blocked all trade routes to the East. Yet, we are never told this.

Up until the 16th century, Italy was regularly invaded by Islam. Otranto was taken by the Turks in 1480, and held for only 10 months. Yet, it was time enough to behead over 800 Christians who refused to convert.

Piracy and kidnapping was so common that Catholic Churches in Southern Europe had donation boxes where the faithful could contribute to ransom hostages.

One could go on and on. The Islamic subjugation of Greece and the Balkans. The kidnapping of hundreds of thousands of Christian boys, over the centuries, to be forcibly converted to Islam, and compelled to serve in the Ottoman Army as Janissaries.

The Islamic attempt to take Vienna. Twice! In 1529 and 1683.

A half million or more slaves from the British Isles were kidnapped on the high seas by the religion of peace.
It was not until the U.S. Marines took on the Barbary Pirates and the French razed Algeria that Islamic predation finally stopped in the 19th century; but all of this is forgotten. Somehow, white Christians are the only villains now.

We hear the Muslims bewail about British imperialism; but the British do not want to go back to Egypt. The Muslim do want Andulasia back. We hear about French crimes in Algeria -- which were real -- but do we remember that Islamic predation that was the real agent which caused the Dark Ages. Europeans were in North Africa for only a century, but Islam pounded Europe for 1200 years. Yet, it is the Arabs who claim victim status.

But what do our politicians do, but apologize for the Crusades. Why?! Have the Muslims apologized for 1400 years of their crimes?!

Part of this idiocy stems from a hyper-liberal view of history which views European Christianity as inherently evil. It permeates the culture of academia; and refuses to see the real evil of Islam.

Sadly, a second cause is an ancillary residue of historiography which has a tradition of exaggerating the real crimes of Catholicism out of all proportion. The Spanish call this exaggeration the Black Legend of the Inquisition; and it results in a pseudo-acquittal of Islam, by blaming the Crusades on Catholicism.

Let us not forget that it was Catholic Europe which insulated Northwest European Protestants from Islam's full fury. It was Catholic Spain which eventually broke the Turkish fleet at the Battle of Lepanto in 1571. It was Catholic Poland's Jan Sobieski who saved Northwest Europe at Vienna in 1683 AD. It was the Catholic French who tamed Algeria in 1830.

Let us not forget either that it was Catholic France which saved the Christians of Lebanon in 1860 while the Protestant British were arming the Druze.

Today we are seeing the 5th Caliphate. The Muslims are seeking to take over Europe. Not by the sword this time (since the would be impossible), but through stealth Jihad. Through illegal and legal immigration. Increase numbers through insane birth rates, create voting blocs to have gutless politicians placate the Muslim population, well over use the welfare state to accommodate their ginorous families in order to put more pressure native population in effect causing the natives to stop having children or as many children. Make the transformation move at rapid pace, so when the West wakes up, it will be either too late or almost too late. Do this while at the same time keep the countries you are coming from close to 100% or increasing to 100%. Turkey, Pakistan, Saudia Arabia, Iraq, Iran and many others are close to 100%. The Islamic countries with Chritian minorities are persecuting those minorities to drive them away Lebanon, Egypt, Syria etc.

Not to late to stop it!

 

[konradv]

Very one-sided article. You mention that Columbus tried to find India because of pirates, even though that was a minor consideration and completely ignored the more important fact that they were looking for a trade route that avoided taxation levied when it crossed Muslim territory.

The article mentions the Byzantine Empire asking for help, but fails to mention that many of its conquered former subjects preferred Muslim rule because taxes were lower. Sounds like a Tea Partier's dream!!!

 

[GHook93]

Leftist historians want to make it all about the Jews, when the Jews were the soft (or secondary) target. Spain and Portugal had be brutally conquested by the Muslims. They were ruled by the Muslims for centuries. Eventually the Spaniards won their country back and wanted to purge the country of the reminents of the Muslim conquers. They began the inquisitions.

Eventually they decided to purge the country of all non-Christians, meaning the Jews were tossed in the boat with the Muslims.

The Muslims were the hard target, Jew were got tossed along with the Muslims.

 

[GHook93]

Very one-sided article. You mention that Columbus tried to find India because of pirates, even though that was a minor consideration and completely ignored the more important fact that they were looking for a trade route that avoided taxation levied when it crossed Muslim territory.

The article mentions the Byzantine Empire asking for help, but fails to mention that many of its conquered former subjects preferred Muslim rule because taxes were lower. Sounds like a Tea Partier's dream!!!

Byzantines were angels either and the crusaders were an homogenous group comprised of the Byzantines.

In fact, the Jews were massacrued by the Byzantines in 628 in Israel/Palestina. In 614 the Jews allied with the Persians and took control of Israel from the Byzantines. The deal was for the Persians to grant the Israelis automony for their alliance. The Persians renigged and made the Jewish rule of Israel/Palestina a Jewish Client state to Persia. The Jews then formed an alliance with the Byzantines in exchange for amnesty and being able to remainin Israel/Palestina. The Byzantines accepted and they worked together to beat the Persians. However, the Byzantines renigged and slaughtered the Jews and forced many to convert.

The Byzantines were weak at the time because of their wars with Perisians and that lead for Moe's take over!

 

[PrometheusBound]

Very one-sided article. You mention that Columbus tried to find India because of pirates, even though that was a minor consideration and completely ignored the more important fact that they were looking for a trade route that avoided taxation levied when it crossed Muslim territory.

The article mentions the Byzantine Empire asking for help, but fails to mention that many of its conquered former subjects preferred Muslim rule because taxes were lower. Sounds like a Tea Partier's dream!!!

Byzantines were angels either and the crusaders were an homogenous group comprised of the Byzantines.

In fact, the Jews were massacrued by the Byzantines in 628 in Israel/Palestina. In 614 the Jews allied with the Persians and took control of Israel from the Byzantines. The deal was for the Persians to grant the Israelis automony for their alliance. The Persians renigged and made the Jewish rule of Israel/Palestina a Jewish Client state to Persia. The Jews then formed an alliance with the Byzantines in exchange for amnesty and being able to remainin Israel/Palestina. The Byzantines accepted and they worked together to beat the Persians. However, the Byzantines renigged and slaughtered the Jews and forced many to convert.

The Byzantines were weak at the time because of their wars with Perisians and that lead for Moe's take over!

Medina was a Jewish city before it was stolen by that desert bandit Mohammed.

One of the things that show how oil money changes the meaning of words we use is that Eisenhower called his book about World War II Crusade in Europe. In the Orwellian Newspeak of today, that would make him a Nazi!

How did Muzzies wind up in the desert, the jungle, and the mountains, that is, literally in No Man's Land? No prehistoric tribe would have chosen such places to settle in. Therefore, they must have been criminal fugitives escaping to places where none of the evolved tribes would follow them, probably giving them up for dead. We've paid for that mistake over the millennia since then.

 

[ThirdTerm]

In the latter half of the 9th century, Europe was going through a period of peace and tens of thousands of trained warriors had become redundant, who always sought an outlet for their violence. By answering the Byzantine Empire's plea for help to retake its lost territories including Jerusalem, the Vatican was hoping for containing widespread violence in Europe by those rogue warriors at the same time. Moreover, capturing profitable trading colonies in the Arab-controlled territories served the economic interests of various Italian city-states and international trade flourished as a result, which contributed greatly to the Renaissance of the 12th century by fundamentally transforming early medieval Europe to a homogeneous European society and culture.

First and foremost, if the popes who promoted the Crusades gained the authority to muster an army and send it on a mission—it should be noted that they never acquired the actual power of a field commander to oversee a battle or call for specific maneuvers—in the end, their excursion into the armed forces did more damage than good to the prestige of the papacy. By the last Crusade, many in Europe had come to see the Pope as just another war-mongering king, not the guardian of souls who stand before heaven's gate. But in other respects, these Church-sanctioned wars brought some benefit to Medieval Europe. For instance, crusading allowed westerners to take advantage of the much richer East for the first time since the days of ancient Rome. More important, it served as an outlet for Europe's youth and aggression as population exploded during the High Middle Ages (1050-1300 CE). That is, sending young men off to fight in a holy cause stifled, if only briefly, the internal wars which had racked the West since the collapse of Roman government and forestalled the self-destruction that would again characterize European history in the centuries to come. Moreover, the mere fact that a few of these Crusades produced victories of some kind helped Europeans regain a sense of self-confidence—after centuries of losing on nearly every front imaginable, they finally turned the tables on their military and cultural superiors to the east—the resulting surge of optimism that followed the minority of Crusades which eked out some measure of success contributed in no small way to the glorious twelfth-century renaissance in art and literature which swept Europe during the High Middle Ages.
1320: Section 15: The Crusades and Medieval Christianity

 

[gipper]

Not much changes when one looks at the history of human beings. That history has some common threads. They are in my opinion, first and foremost murder, rape, and pillage. It continues today.

Jesus Christ preached peace. Sadly, few listened.

What did Mohammed preach and what are the actions of his people today?

It is human nature to commit heinous actions against fellow humans. Will we ever learn to stop this insanity? The driving force behind all this is radical ideology. Whether it is radical Islam or the Neocon/Progressive radical desire for empire, both lead to death and destruction.

 

[GHook93]

In the latter half of the 9th century, Europe was going through a period of peace and tens of thousands of trained warriors had become redundant, who always sought an outlet for their violence. By answering the Byzantine Empire's plea for help to retake its lost territories including Jerusalem, the Vatican was hoping for containing widespread violence in Europe by those rogue warriors at the same time. Moreover, capturing profitable trading colonies in the Arab-controlled territories served the economic interests of various Italian city-states and international trade flourished as a result, which contributed greatly to the Renaissance of the 12th century by fundamentally transforming early medieval Europe to a homogeneous European society and culture.

First and foremost, if the popes who promoted the Crusades gained the authority to muster an army and send it on a mission—it should be noted that they never acquired the actual power of a field commander to oversee a battle or call for specific maneuvers—in the end, their excursion into the armed forces did more damage than good to the prestige of the papacy. By the last Crusade, many in Europe had come to see the Pope as just another war-mongering king, not the guardian of souls who stand before heaven's gate. But in other respects, these Church-sanctioned wars brought some benefit to Medieval Europe. For instance, crusading allowed westerners to take advantage of the much richer East for the first time since the days of ancient Rome. More important, it served as an outlet for Europe's youth and aggression as population exploded during the High Middle Ages (1050-1300 CE). That is, sending young men off to fight in a holy cause stifled, if only briefly, the internal wars which had racked the West since the collapse of Roman government and forestalled the self-destruction that would again characterize European history in the centuries to come. Moreover, the mere fact that a few of these Crusades produced victories of some kind helped Europeans regain a sense of self-confidence—after centuries of losing on nearly every front imaginable, they finally turned the tables on their military and cultural superiors to the east—the resulting surge of optimism that followed the minority of Crusades which eked out some measure of success contributed in no small way to the glorious twelfth-century renaissance in art and literature which swept Europe during the High Middle Ages.
1320: Section 15: The Crusades and Medieval Christianity

Europe was going through Peace? Seriously is that what you are claiming? Very foolish and ignorant!

 

[GHook93]

Not much changes when one looks at the history of human beings. That history has some common threads. They are in my opinion, first and foremost murder, rape, and pillage. It continues today.

Very true, but Islam was alway a religion of murder, rape, pillage, conquest, forced conversion and enslavement!

Jesus Christ preached peace. Sadly, few listened.

Not true, the Evangelicals of today are some of the kindest, caring, most charitiable, most understanding (unless your gay) and most accepting (unless your gay) people out there. I am not an Evangelical, but I have a lot of respect for them as a whole. True Evangelicals are the best people on the planet!

What did Mohammed preach and what are the actions of his people today?

He preached rape, pillage, robbery, lying, deception, pedophilia, forced marriage, forced conversion, assassination, genocide, bigotry and spread your beliefs by the sword. He was an evil man in every sense of the word. Jesus was not!

 

[surada]

Leftist historians want to make it all about the Jews, when the Jews were the soft (or secondary) target. Spain and Portugal had be brutally conquested by the Muslims. They were ruled by the Muslims for centuries. Eventually the Spaniards won their country back and wanted to purge the country of the reminents of the Muslim conquers. They began the inquisitions.

Eventually they decided to purge the country of all non-Christians, meaning the Jews were tossed in the boat with the Muslims.

The Muslims were the hard target, Jew were got tossed along with the Muslims.

The Jews fought with Muslims to conquer Spain.

 

[surada]

Leftist historians want to make it all about the Jews, when the Jews were the soft (or secondary) target. Spain and Portugal had be brutally conquested by the Muslims. They were ruled by the Muslims for centuries. Eventually the Spaniards won their country back and wanted to purge the country of the reminents of the Muslim conquers. They began the inquisitions.

Eventually they decided to purge the country of all non-Christians, meaning the Jews were tossed in the boat with the Muslims.

The Muslims were the hard target, Jew were got tossed along with the Muslims.

Are you talking about the pagan Visigoths?

 

[Mr. Friscus]

The Jews fought with Muslims to conquer Spain.

No matter what collaboration happened, Islam expanded and conquered most of the Mediterranian up from Istanbul/Turkey to past Spain/almost France. Woke historians pretend that brutal conquest didn't happen, and attempt to portray the Crusades as some unprovoked attack on peaceful people. The Muslims had invaded and conquered so much of the entire Mediterranian world, Christian Crusaders were called to respond. It was a response by any metric. Crusaders were called in pure spirit and acted in sinful behavior many times. However, they weren't some uniquely evil people... Muslims started the beef, they were the evil instigators.