Two things I learned about the Crusades . . .

[teddyearp]

Well, the first one was brought up in this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/israe...tic-studies-on-palestinians-and-israelis.html

Where it was claimed that the Crusaders cannibalized folks in Jerusalem, according to this post:

<snip>By the way, did you know that when Jerusalem was captured by the Crusaders (I think this was the second crusade), they ATE the inhabitants?!?!? Yes, Muslim and Jewish and even a few Christians, they ATE them! I used to hear this when I was in the Middle East and thought it was just empty propaganda, but when I took history in college, OMG, it turned out to be true.

So, I asked and asked and asked over and over again in that thread for some sort of link. Finally, I got tired and decided to do some 'googling' of my own and found several references to the Crusaders cannibalizing some folks, not in Jerusalem, but in another town called Ma&#8217;aarra. Here's the same link that amity1844 posted in the other thread:

Siege of Ma'arra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

here's another from the History Channel for what it's worth:

This Day in History - December 12, 1098 - Crusaders Become Cannibals

And here's another one that comes from a very unbiased source (lol):

The Bloodbaths of the Crusades Against Muslims. By Dr. Abdullah Mohammad Sindi - Radio Islam

None of these including the unbiased one I posted last talk about cannibalism in Jerusalem during the crusades. Sorry [MENTION=49350]amity1844[/MENTION], but thank you for trying.


However, the second thing I learned about the crusades was from that last link also. It seems as though the Muslims still hold what happened during the Crusades against the western world to this day. Wow. Educational. But I believe I have heard about this here and there (no links, no proof, just conjecture).

Let me post the link again, since I am on my 'part two' of my post:

The Bloodbaths of the Crusades Against Muslims. By Dr. Abdullah Mohammad Sindi - Radio Islam

So in the above unbiased report, it seems as though we westerners have been having an "insane bloodbath" against the Arabs since then. Really it's a long read. And to be honest, I didn't quite read all of it, however, in it's unbiased approach, this line in the paragraph below stuck out to me:

Nevertheless, the Western Crusades' insane bloodbaths against the Arabs were triggered by the decisive defeat of the Byzantine army in 1071 at the hands of the Turkish Seljuk (Abbasid) army. Fearing that all of Asia Minor would be quickly overrun by the Abbasids, the defeated Byzantine emperor, Alexius I, quickly appealed to his Christian rivals and opponents in Western Europe, i.e., Pope Urban II and his other "fellow" Christian rulers, to come to the aid of Constantinople by undertaking a "pilgrimage" or Crusade to "free" Jerusalem and the rest of Palestine from Arab and Muslim rule.

So why not plead for help to curb the onslaught? I don't have the links to post now, but if I remember correctly, Islam was spreading not like Christianity like a lamb, but like a lion with the sword. Back in those days, from what I remember from my history lessons, Islam was spreading by the sword through most of northern Africa and was (or had been) in Spain as well. So if Islam was now knowing at Constantinople's (the Byzantine capital) doors, why not amass an army and fight back?

Now, when I post such a long post, my two or three brain cells sometimes burn out, but in closing, I did have to make sure that it was the Islam/Turks who took the offensive on the Byzantines. It was:

Byzantine?Seljuq wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[amity1844]

Christianity spread like a lamb?

Now, I am a Christian, and yet I am here to tell you that once the Christians acquired the swords, it di NOT spread like a lamb, no, no, no, no.

I don't know why you aren't happy with the Seige of Marra as an instance of cannibalism? it counts. The Christians were hungry and the Saracens were meat.

 

[amity1844]

Its really disgusting, but look, I'm not going any further than this. I would rather concede:

Cannibalism During the Crusades

 

[koshergrl]

The crusades didn't "spread" Christianity, you illiterate ding dongs.

What is now called the Middle East was CHRISTIAN and the MUSLIMS spread ISLAM by force there. The Crusades were taken in response to the Islamafication of the middle east.

Muslims slaughtered their way across the middle east, the near east, to the very gates of France. The crusades were Christians pushing back against them.

 

[koshergrl]

"In 1095 Pope Urban II proclaimed the First Crusade with the stated goal of restoring Christian access to holy places in and near Jerusalem."

"Byzantine Empire was unable to recover territory lost during the initial Muslim conquests under the expansionist Rashidun and Umayyad caliphs in the Arab&#8211;Byzantine Wars and the Byzantine&#8211;Seljuq Wars; these conquests culminated in the loss of fertile farmlands[3] and vast grazing areas of Anatolia[4] in 1071, after a sound victory by the occupying armies of Seljuk Turks at the Battle of Manzikert. Urban II sought to reunite the Christian church under his leadership by providing Emperor Alexios I with military support."
Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

fucking idiots. Even wiki knows more than you do.

 

[amity1844]

The crusades didn't "spread" Christianity, you illiterate ding dongs.

What is now called the Middle East was CHRISTIAN and the MUSLIMS spread ISLAM by force there. The Crusades were taken in response to the Islamafication of the middle east.

Muslims slaughtered their way across the middle east, the near east, to the very gates of France. The crusades were Christians pushing back against them.

that's baloney. I know you probably live in a world of baloney, but I hope you try to think independently. Read about how Christianity spread through various cultures of Europe, both before and after the crusades, and you will be satisfied that there was at least as much "sword" and probably more, than was involved in the spread of Islam.

 

[Sally]

The crusades didn't "spread" Christianity, you illiterate ding dongs.

What is now called the Middle East was CHRISTIAN and the MUSLIMS spread ISLAM by force there. The Crusades were taken in response to the Islamafication of the middle east.

Muslims slaughtered their way across the middle east, the near east, to the very gates of France. The crusades were Christians pushing back against them.

Let's be happy that they were at least stopped at the Gates of Vienna, although the radicals are now talking about a new Caliphate in the world of today.

 

[amity1844]

I did find one other interesting article that at least mentions some of the primary sources by name:

The Crusades as Medieval World War (Part 2) | God Discussion

The reports of the conquest of Jerusalem are sickening, but I'll admit there is no mention of cannibalism. I may have to concede but I do remember reading a primary account of it in college that was very explicit. At any rate, I don't want to go further into this myself, y'all have fun.

 

[koshergrl]

You are a fucking idiot.

 

[koshergrl]

"The Arab conquests: 7th century

One of the most dramatic and sudden movements of any people in history is the expansion, by conquest, of the Arabs in the 7th century (only the example of the Mongols in the 13th century can match it). The desert tribesmen of Arabia form the bulk of the Muslim armies. Their natural ferocity and love of warfare, together with the sense of moral rectitude provided by their new religion, form an irresistible combination.

When Muhammad dies in 632, the western half of Arabia is Muslim. Two years later the entire peninsula has been brought to the faith, and Muslim armies have moved up into the desert between Syria and Mesopotamia.



The great Christian cities of Syria and Palestine fall to the Arabs in rapid succession from635. Damascus, in that year, is the first to be captured. Antioch follows in 636. And 638 brings the greatest prize of all, in Muslim terms, when Jerusalem is taken after a year's siege.

It is a moment of profound significance for the young religion, for Islam sees itself as the successor of Judaism and Christianity."


Read more: HISTORY OF THE ARABS

 

[amity1844]

your bylines are:

In May the APA, which represents more than 33,000 psychiatrists in the United States and elsewhere, released the fifth edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), in which pedophilia is described as a sexual &#8220;orientation.&#8221;
http://www.thenewamerican.com/cultur...classification


"Fundamentalist Christians should be institutionalized and not be allowed to breed . . . hopefully that day is coming." guno http://www.usmessageboard.com/israe.../israel-and-palestine/health...the-state.html

... and yet you saying that someone other than yourself is a "fucking idiot"....???


So, okay FI, how does your quote establish that Islam was spread by the sword? My whole point is that the territory was conquered and the people largely left to follow their own faiths and accordingly pay a tax ... which was used to fund further conquest. That seems to accord nicely with your quote.

You can start here and follow the links and see what you find:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquests

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_Islam#Greater_Syria

The Muslim Saracen army attacked Jerusalem, held by the Byzantine Romans, in November, 636 CE. For four months, the siege continued. Ultimately, the Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem, Sophronius, an ethnic Arab,[17] agreed to surrender Jerusalem to caliph Omar in person. The caliph, then at Medina, agreed to these terms and travelled to Jerusalem to sign the capitulation in the spring of 637. Sophronius also negotiated a pact with Omar, known as the Umariyya Covenant or Covenant of Omar, allowing for religious freedom for Christians in exchange for "jizya", a tax to be paid by conquered non-Muslims, called "dhimmis". Under Muslim Rule, the Christian and Jewish population of Jerusalem in this period enjoyed the usual tolerance given to non-Muslim theists.[18][19]

Having accepted the surrender, Omar then entered Jerusalem with Sophronius "and courteously discoursed with the patriarch concerning its religious antiquities".[20] When the hour for his prayer came, Omar was in the Anastasis church, but refused to pray there, lest in the future Muslims should use that as an excuse to break the treaty and confiscate the church. The Mosque of Omar, opposite the doors of the Anastasis, with the tall minaret, is known as the place to which he retired for his prayer.

Bishop Arculf, whose account of his pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the 7th century, De Locis Sanctis, written down by the monk Adamnan, described reasonably pleasant living conditions of Christians in Palestine in the first period of Muslim rule. The caliphs of Damascus (661-750) were tolerant princes who were on generally good terms with their Christian subjects. Many Christians (e.g. St. John Damascene) held important offices at their court. The Abbasid caliphs at Baghdad (753-1242), as long as they ruled Syria, were also tolerant to Christians. Harun Abu-Ja-'afar (786-809), sent the keys of the Holy Sepulchre to Charlemagne, who built a hospice for Latin pilgrims near the shrine.[18]

Rival dynasties and revolutions led to the eventual disunion of the Muslim world. In the 9th century, Palestine was conquered by the Fatimid dynasty of North Africa. Palestine once again became a battleground as the various enemies of the Fatimids attacked. At the same time, the Byzantine Greeks continued to attempt to regain their lost territories, including Jerusalem. Christians in Jerusalem who sided with the Byzantines were put to death for high treason by the ruling Muslims. In 969, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, John VII, was put to death for treasonous correspondence with the Byzantines. As Jerusalem grew in importance to Muslims and pilgrimages increased, tolerance for other religions declined. Christians were persecuted and churches destroyed. The sixth Fatimid caliph, Caliph Al-Hakim, 996-1021, who was believed to be "God made manifest" by the Druze, destroyed the Holy Sepulchre in 1009. This powerful provocation helped ignite the flame of fury that led to the First Crusade.[18]

And lastly, here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamization_of_Palestine

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_history_in_the_region_of_Palestine

 

[koshergrl]

Disgusting indeed.

 

[koshergrl]

Tell me, did you drop out in 6th or 7th grade?

 

[koshergrl]

"Arabs in Spain and France: 711-732

The short journey across the water from Africa, bringing an army into Spain in 711, begins the final thrust of Arab expansionism in the west. In a frequently repeated pattern of history the invaders, invited to assist one side in a quarrel, rapidly take control and suppress both squabbling parties. Within a few months the Arabs drive the Visigoths from their capital at Toledo.

Soon governors appointed by the caliph in Damascus are ruling much of Spain. The Arabs press on northwards. Their armies move into Gaul, and here at last they are halted - near Poitiers in 732.


Read more: HISTORY OF THE ARABS

 

[koshergrl]

"Stability in Spain is restored by an Umayyad prince, Abd-al-Rahman, who escapes the Abbasid massacre of his family in Syria. He establishes himself in 756 at Cordoba. Here he founds the first great Muslim civilization of Spain.










Abd-al-Rahman begins the process of making Cordoba one of the outstanding cities of the medieval world. On the site of a Roman temple and Visigothic church he builds the famous mosque, with schools and hospitals attached, which survives today as a place of great beauty - even though its vistas of columns and striped arches are brutally interrupted by alterations made for its later use as the city's cathedral.

Cordoba continues to grow in size and wealth and reputation, known equally for its skilled craftsmen and its scholars. Under Abd-al-Rahman III, in the 10th century, it has probably half a million inhabitants. He is the first amir of Cordoba to accord himself the resounding title of caliph.








During the three centuries of Umayyad rule in Spain the Arabs are for the most part in control of almost the entire peninsula. The Christian reconquest makes several tentative beginnings during the period, but northern territories are often then regained by Arab rulers - relying heavily on the wild Berber mercenaries who form the bulk of their armies.


Read more: HISTORY OF THE ARABS

 

[Picaro]

So why not plead for help to curb the onslaught? I don't have the links to post now, but if I remember correctly, Islam was spreading not like Christianity like a lamb, but like a lion with the sword. Back in those days, from what I remember from my history lessons, Islam was spreading by the sword through most of northern Africa and was (or had been) in Spain as well. So if Islam was now knowing at Constantinople's (the Byzantine capital) doors, why not amass an army and fight back?

They were invading France until turned back by Charles Martel, and parts of Spain were still ruled by them until well into the Middle Ages, so yes, the Crusades were defensive wars, and aimed to retake what was formerly non-Muslim territory. They were squeezing Europe on three sides.

 

[teddyearp]

Christianity spread like a lamb?

Now, I am a Christian, and yet I am here to tell you that once the Christians acquired the swords, it di NOT spread like a lamb, no, no, no, no.

I don't know why you aren't happy with the Seige of Marra as an instance of cannibalism? it counts. The Christians were hungry and the Saracens were meat.

Yes, Christianity spread like a lamb throughout Israel and to the Gentile countries around ?C.E. after the resurrection of Christ. I am Christian too.

It was centuries afterwards after Islam was born and attacked (as my link clearly shows) the Byzantines (the eastern converted Roman Empire) that the Christians acquired the swords. And then yes, it did get ugly.

My first part of this post was to refute your claim of cannibalism during the Crusades upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Your claim of this incident is refuted fully. Why? Because your 'Seige of Marra' and the subsequent actions were not in Jerusalem as you had previously claimed.

That is the only reason that I am not 'happy' with that. Because you claimed it to be in one place, but it was not.

If you want to be credible here, do not post half truths.

 

[guno]

Well, the first one was brought up in this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/israe...tic-studies-on-palestinians-and-israelis.html

Where it was claimed that the Crusaders cannibalized folks in Jerusalem, according to this post:

<snip>By the way, did you know that when Jerusalem was captured by the Crusaders (I think this was the second crusade), they ATE the inhabitants?!?!? Yes, Muslim and Jewish and even a few Christians, they ATE them! I used to hear this when I was in the Middle East and thought it was just empty propaganda, but when I took history in college, OMG, it turned out to be true.

So, I asked and asked and asked over and over again in that thread for some sort of link. Finally, I got tired and decided to do some 'googling' of my own and found several references to the Crusaders cannibalizing some folks, not in Jerusalem, but in another town called Ma’aarra. Here's the same link that amity1844 posted in the other thread:

Siege of Ma'arra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

here's another from the History Channel for what it's worth:

This Day in History - December 12, 1098 - Crusaders Become Cannibals

And here's another one that comes from a very unbiased source (lol):

The Bloodbaths of the Crusades Against Muslims. By Dr. Abdullah Mohammad Sindi - Radio Islam

None of these including the unbiased one I posted last talk about cannibalism in Jerusalem during the crusades. Sorry [MENTION=49350]amity1844[/MENTION], but thank you for trying.


However, the second thing I learned about the crusades was from that last link also. It seems as though the Muslims still hold what happened during the Crusades against the western world to this day. Wow. Educational. But I believe I have heard about this here and there (no links, no proof, just conjecture).

Let me post the link again, since I am on my 'part two' of my post:

The Bloodbaths of the Crusades Against Muslims. By Dr. Abdullah Mohammad Sindi - Radio Islam

So in the above unbiased report, it seems as though we westerners have been having an "insane bloodbath" against the Arabs since then. Really it's a long read. And to be honest, I didn't quite read all of it, however, in it's unbiased approach, this line in the paragraph below stuck out to me:

Nevertheless, the Western Crusades' insane bloodbaths against the Arabs were triggered by the decisive defeat of the Byzantine army in 1071 at the hands of the Turkish Seljuk (Abbasid) army. Fearing that all of Asia Minor would be quickly overrun by the Abbasids, the defeated Byzantine emperor, Alexius I, quickly appealed to his Christian rivals and opponents in Western Europe, i.e., Pope Urban II and his other "fellow" Christian rulers, to come to the aid of Constantinople by undertaking a "pilgrimage" or Crusade to "free" Jerusalem and the rest of Palestine from Arab and Muslim rule.

So why not plead for help to curb the onslaught? I don't have the links to post now, but if I remember correctly, Islam was spreading not like Christianity like a lamb, but like a lion with the sword. Back in those days, from what I remember from my history lessons, Islam was spreading by the sword through most of northern Africa and was (or had been) in Spain as well. So if Islam was now knowing at Constantinople's (the Byzantine capital) doors, why not amass an army and fight back?

Now, when I post such a long post, my two or three brain cells sometimes burn out, but in closing, I did have to make sure that it was the Islam/Turks who took the offensive on the Byzantines. It was:

Byzantine?Seljuq wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jews were also victims of the christer goyim in the crusades

History of the Jews and the Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Crusades | Jewish Virtual Library

 

[guno]

Well, the first one was brought up in this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/israe...tic-studies-on-palestinians-and-israelis.html

Where it was claimed that the Crusaders cannibalized folks in Jerusalem, according to this post:

<snip>By the way, did you know that when Jerusalem was captured by the Crusaders (I think this was the second crusade), they ATE the inhabitants?!?!? Yes, Muslim and Jewish and even a few Christians, they ATE them! I used to hear this when I was in the Middle East and thought it was just empty propaganda, but when I took history in college, OMG, it turned out to be true.

So, I asked and asked and asked over and over again in that thread for some sort of link. Finally, I got tired and decided to do some 'googling' of my own and found several references to the Crusaders cannibalizing some folks, not in Jerusalem, but in another town called Ma’aarra. Here's the same link that amity1844 posted in the other thread:

Siege of Ma'arra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

here's another from the History Channel for what it's worth:

This Day in History - December 12, 1098 - Crusaders Become Cannibals

And here's another one that comes from a very unbiased source (lol):

The Bloodbaths of the Crusades Against Muslims. By Dr. Abdullah Mohammad Sindi - Radio Islam

None of these including the unbiased one I posted last talk about cannibalism in Jerusalem during the crusades. Sorry [MENTION=49350]amity1844[/MENTION], but thank you for trying.


However, the second thing I learned about the crusades was from that last link also. It seems as though the Muslims still hold what happened during the Crusades against the western world to this day. Wow. Educational. But I believe I have heard about this here and there (no links, no proof, just conjecture).

Let me post the link again, since I am on my 'part two' of my post:

The Bloodbaths of the Crusades Against Muslims. By Dr. Abdullah Mohammad Sindi - Radio Islam

So in the above unbiased report, it seems as though we westerners have been having an "insane bloodbath" against the Arabs since then. Really it's a long read. And to be honest, I didn't quite read all of it, however, in it's unbiased approach, this line in the paragraph below stuck out to me:

Nevertheless, the Western Crusades' insane bloodbaths against the Arabs were triggered by the decisive defeat of the Byzantine army in 1071 at the hands of the Turkish Seljuk (Abbasid) army. Fearing that all of Asia Minor would be quickly overrun by the Abbasids, the defeated Byzantine emperor, Alexius I, quickly appealed to his Christian rivals and opponents in Western Europe, i.e., Pope Urban II and his other "fellow" Christian rulers, to come to the aid of Constantinople by undertaking a "pilgrimage" or Crusade to "free" Jerusalem and the rest of Palestine from Arab and Muslim rule.

So why not plead for help to curb the onslaught? I don't have the links to post now, but if I remember correctly, Islam was spreading not like Christianity like a lamb, but like a lion with the sword. Back in those days, from what I remember from my history lessons, Islam was spreading by the sword through most of northern Africa and was (or had been) in Spain as well. So if Islam was now knowing at Constantinople's (the Byzantine capital) doors, why not amass an army and fight back?

Now, when I post such a long post, my two or three brain cells sometimes burn out, but in closing, I did have to make sure that it was the Islam/Turks who took the offensive on the Byzantines. It was:

Byzantine?Seljuq wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jews were also victims of the christer goyim in the crusades

History of the Jews and the Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Crusades | Jewish Virtual Library

Christian Persecution of Jews over the Centuries: Introduction ? United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

 

[guno]

Well, the first one was brought up in this thread:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/israe...tic-studies-on-palestinians-and-israelis.html

Where it was claimed that the Crusaders cannibalized folks in Jerusalem, according to this post:



So, I asked and asked and asked over and over again in that thread for some sort of link. Finally, I got tired and decided to do some 'googling' of my own and found several references to the Crusaders cannibalizing some folks, not in Jerusalem, but in another town called Ma’aarra. Here's the same link that amity1844 posted in the other thread:

Siege of Ma'arra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

here's another from the History Channel for what it's worth:

This Day in History - December 12, 1098 - Crusaders Become Cannibals

And here's another one that comes from a very unbiased source (lol):

The Bloodbaths of the Crusades Against Muslims. By Dr. Abdullah Mohammad Sindi - Radio Islam

None of these including the unbiased one I posted last talk about cannibalism in Jerusalem during the crusades. Sorry [MENTION=49350]amity1844[/MENTION], but thank you for trying.


However, the second thing I learned about the crusades was from that last link also. It seems as though the Muslims still hold what happened during the Crusades against the western world to this day. Wow. Educational. But I believe I have heard about this here and there (no links, no proof, just conjecture).

Let me post the link again, since I am on my 'part two' of my post:

The Bloodbaths of the Crusades Against Muslims. By Dr. Abdullah Mohammad Sindi - Radio Islam

So in the above unbiased report, it seems as though we westerners have been having an "insane bloodbath" against the Arabs since then. Really it's a long read. And to be honest, I didn't quite read all of it, however, in it's unbiased approach, this line in the paragraph below stuck out to me:



So why not plead for help to curb the onslaught? I don't have the links to post now, but if I remember correctly, Islam was spreading not like Christianity like a lamb, but like a lion with the sword. Back in those days, from what I remember from my history lessons, Islam was spreading by the sword through most of northern Africa and was (or had been) in Spain as well. So if Islam was now knowing at Constantinople's (the Byzantine capital) doors, why not amass an army and fight back?

Now, when I post such a long post, my two or three brain cells sometimes burn out, but in closing, I did have to make sure that it was the Islam/Turks who took the offensive on the Byzantines. It was:

Byzantine?Seljuq wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jews were also victims of the christer goyim in the crusades

History of the Jews and the Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Crusades | Jewish Virtual Library

Christian Persecution of Jews over the Centuries: Introduction ? United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

1096: The First Crusade was launched in this year. Although the prime goal of the crusades was to liberate Jerusalem from the Muslims, Jews were a second target. As the soldiers passed through Europe on the way to the Holy Land, large numbers of Jews were challenged: "Christ-killers, embrace the Cross or die!" 12,000 Jews in the Rhine Valley alone were killed in the first Crusade. This behavior continued for 8 additional crusades until the 9th in 1272.