it’s very funny/odd that the ‘Christian Crusades’ are always mentioned but the ‘Muslim Crusades’ which begat the Christian crusades is NEVER mentioned- The FACT is that the Christian crusades were a defensive act against muslim aggression that had been ongoing for quite some time- The Christian crusades were a direct result of the MUSLIM CRUSADES that were waged against Christians and Jews. Muhammad initiated and ordered aggression against the Christian ‘infidels’ and ordered that their lands be taken by the sword- which they did!
I don’t hear anyone on Fox news getting the FACTS out to the public who are largely ignorant of what actually happened, and who mistakenly think the Christian Crusades were an order by the church to plunder, murder and convert via the sword- the Crusades were NOT - Some crusaders did go astray, however, they were NOT doing so under the orders from the church, they were doing so under the influence of the evil one because these people were NOT saved to begin with- God NEVER ordered such atrocities, and those few that did so were NOT following orders from God- Period!
Early in the eighth century, sixty Christian pilgrims [to the Holy Land] from Amorium were crucified [by Muslims]; around the same time, the Muslim governor of Caesarea seized a group of pilgrims from Iconium and had them all executed as spies…
Brutal subordination and violence became the rules of the day for [or against] Christians in the Holy Land. In 772, the caliph al-Mansur ordered the hands of Christians and Jews in Jerusalem be stamped with a distinctive symbol. Conversions to Christianity were dealt with particularly harshly. In 789, Muslims beheaded a [Christian] monk who had converted from Islam and plundered the Bethlehem monastery of Saint Theodosius, killing many more monks. Other monasteries in the region suffered the same fate. Early in the ninth century, the persecutions grew so severe that large numbers of Christians fled to Constantinople [the eastern center of Christianity] and other Christian cities. More persecutions in 923 saw additional churches destroyed, and in 937, Muslims went on a Palm Sunday rampage in Jerusalem, plundering and destroying the Church of Calvary and the Church of the Resurrection.
From Spencer, Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam, 122-23.
“Though European Crusaders may have been sincere, they wandered off from the origins of Christianity when they slashed and burned and forced conversions. Jesus never used violence; neither did he call his disciples to use it. Given this historical fact, it is only natural that the New Testament would never endorse violence to spread the word of the true God. Textual reality matches historical reality.
In contrast, Muslims who slashed and burned and forced conversions did not wander off from the origins of Islam, but followed it closely. It is a plain and unpleasant historical fact that in the ten years that Muhammad lived in Medina (622-632), he either sent out or went out on seventy-four raids, expeditions, or full-scale wars, which range from small assassination hit squads to the Tabuk Crusade [630]... Sometimes the expeditions did not result in violence, but a Muslim army always lurked in the background. Later on, Muhammad could exact a terrible vengeance on an individual or tribe that double-crossed him. These ten years did not know long stretches of peace.
Therefore, it is only natural that the Quran would be filled with references to jihad and qital, the latter word meaning only fighting, killing, warring, and slaughtering. Textual reality matches historical reality.
But this means that the Church had to fight back or be swallowed up by an aggressive religion over the centuries. Thus, the Church did not go out and conquer in a mindless, bloodthirsty, and irrational way––though the Christian Crusades were far from perfect.
Islam was the aggressor in its own Crusades, long before the Europeans responded with their own.”
From: James M. Arlandson, “Timeline of the Islamic Crusades; The Truth about Islamic Imperialism,” (http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/crusades_timeline.htm, August 1, 2013).
As the Left is fond of saying, “don’t confuse them with facts”. I’d love to hear O’Reilly do a chronological piece on the “Crusades” and where the Christian campaigns fit against Islamic incursions. Ive long considered what we see today with the muslims as a result of the strength of oil money allowing them to push forward again. The muslims think in terms of centuries, whilst the West think in terms of who’s next on American Idol. This could be a fatal mistake for the West.