RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: The Crusades: Nothing to be Ashamed About - RightNation.US

Jump to content

  Like

3 Comments On This Entry

Hi Chris.

I agree with your overall point especially vis-a-vis comparing christians v muslims. But I disagree with the idea that there was "nothing" to be ashamed of.

Let's not forget that while the Muslims undoubtedly got the brunt of the crusaders' wrath, the Jews did not go unscathed; The crusades - especially the FIRST Crusade - all but eradicated "Ashkenazi" Jewry; I'd even go so far as to call this the original 'Holocaust'. Heck, I'll go even further and say that the Holocaust of the 1930s/1940s may not have even happened if the crusaders hadn't first set the example.

For all practical purposes, the only difference between how the crusaders treated Muslims and Jews was that they killed Muslims outright whilst Jews were given a chance to convert or be killed.

"Convert or Die". I'm just not sure I grok the nuance between a Crusader saying that to a Jew, and a modern-day member of Those ISILs™ or Boko Haraam saying that to a non-muslim. Either way, dead is dead. When you do that to a non-combatant 'civilian', there's a word for it that starts with a 'T'. The crusaders were guilty of it.

If the crusaders had to go though a "Nuremburg" today? The verdict would undoubtedly be "guilty".

Even MORE egregious is that after the loss of Jerusalem (1187) the crusaders increasingly turned upon our own fellow Christians with things like the "Albigensian Crusade" against "Cathars" (1209-1229), and ESPECIALLY after the fall of ACRE in 1291 turned increasingly inward culminating in "The Inquisition", in which not only Muslims but Jews BOTH got the brunt of it.

KILL someone because they either worship a different God, or even worship the SAME God in a different manner? NO. That's where *I* get off the bus.
0

Dean Adam Smithee, on 02 February 2019 - 03:18 PM, said:

Hi Chris.I agree with your overall point especially vis-a-vis comparing christians v muslims. But I disagree with the idea that there was "nothing" to be ashamed of.Let's not forget that while the Muslims undoubtedly got the brunt of the crusaders' wrath, the Jews did not go unscathed; The crusades - especially the FIRST Crusade - all but eradicated "Ashkenazi" Jewry; I'd even go so far as to call this the original 'Holocaust'. Heck, I'll go even further and say that the Holocaust of the 1930s/1940s may not have even happened if the crusaders hadn't first set the example. For all practical purposes, the only difference between how the crusaders treated Muslims and Jews was that they killed Muslims outright whilst Jews were given a chance to convert or be killed. "Convert or Die". I'm just not sure I grok the nuance between a Crusader saying that to a Jew, and a modern-day member of Those ISILs™ or Boko Haraam saying that to a non-muslim. Either way, dead is dead. When you do that to a non-combatant 'civilian', there's a word for it that starts with a 'T'. The crusaders were guilty of it. If the crusaders had to go though a "Nuremburg" today? The verdict would undoubtedly be "guilty".Even MORE egregious is that after the loss of Jerusalem (1187) the crusaders increasingly turned upon our own fellow Christians with things like the "Albigensian Crusade" against "Cathars" (1209-1229), and ESPECIALLY after the fall of ACRE in 1291 turned increasingly inward culminating in "The Inquisition", in which not only Muslims but Jews BOTH got the brunt of it.KILL someone because they either worship a different God, or even worship the SAME God in a different manner? NO. That's where *I* get off the bus.


You haven’t given a reason why modern Christians should be ashamed. We had nothing to do with it either way. Also, you act like they just decided one day to get all murderous. Gee, I wonder what might have gotten their dander up.
0
Additionally, the sack of Jerusalem was exaggerated: Link
0
Page 1 of 1

5 user(s) viewing

5 Guests
0 member(s)
0 anonymous member(s)

Search My Blog

Recent Entries

New Blogroll! And...World's Shortest Movie Reviews

Blog Roll
Ace of Spades
National Review
Got News
RealClearPolitics
ZeroHedge
The Federalist
African American Conservatives
Instapundit


World's Shortest Movie Reviews
American Sniper: Bradly Cooper=Best Actor
The Arroyo: Had a Pureflix feel to the acting, but well shot. Great conservative movie.
The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies: As usual, the third installment is the best--having an ending really helped.
The Maze Runner: The perfect metaphor for moving to Detroit.
Dumb and Dumber To: More jokes. Cruder jokes. Someone gets hooked on crack.
Snowpiercer: Joe Biden's idea of heaven. Everyone on the Earth living on a train. Captain America admits he was going to eat Billy Elliot.
Hunger Games: Catching Fire: This is what the world would look like without college football.
Interstellar 2001:A Space Odyssey with a soul. You will get very thirsty, so hydrate before viewing.
When the Game Stands Tall Proves my theory that it's worse when you win.
Guardians of the Galaxy Make a fun adventure movie about space and make a ton of money. Who knew? I mean, besides that Lucas guy.
Blended I don't get the "Billy Madison is genius, Blended is crap" review. It's as good as any other Sandler movie.
Mom's Night Out Hilarious. You will laugh unless you drive a black BMW and watch sunsets at the golf course.
The Amazing Spiderman 2 This series is still better than the Toby McGuire one. I actually cared if Gwen Stacy died.
Odd Thomas I understand the critics who didn't like the uneven tone. Way uneven. Still worth watching on Netflix.
Star Trek Into DarknessGood movie. Please, for the love of tribbles, let old Spock die.
Grown Ups 2 Critics, attack. Whatever you want to say about this one, I'm okay with it.
Thor: The Dark World Still very, very good. But I'd like an entire Thor movie set just in Asgard.