Channel: Home | About

How fair is it to point to the "crimes of Christianity" during the crusades, as justification for Muslim outrage toward the West today; Christendom in particular? Too many people ignorantly point to the Crusades and say,

"See! Christianity has no room to talk about Radical Islam! What about Radical Christianity!? Yeah! So there!"


Do these people [whom I precipitously called "ignorant"] have a valid point?

Tacking into the wind, what about Israel? What about all these same people castigating Israel for not responding "proportionally" to her tormentors? What obligation does a society have toward its own survival? If any? How long does a populous have to wait before they can legitimately not only defend themselves but take the fight into the heart of their oppressors?

Four-hundred sixty-three years.

Now, I did use the word "ignorant" precipitously. Guilty as charged. I had intended to use it in summation, but never fear, you'll see it again.

Oh! Sorry... why specifically 463 years? Read on...

(From Roger Sandall's essay on Religion and Violence)

[T]he 463 years between the death of Muhammed in 632 AD, and the First Crusade in 1095, were extremely dangerous for Christian Europe. Instead of peace there were unrelenting Islamic wars and incursions; Muslim invasions of Spain, Italy, Sicily and Sardinia; raids, seizures, looting of treasure, military occupations that lasted until Saracen forces were forcibly dislodged, sackings of Christian cities including Rome, and desecrations of Christian shrines. And be it noted: all this went on for 463 years before any Christian Crusade in response to these murderous provocations took place.

Sixteen years after the death of Muhammed, in 648 AD, Cyprus was overrun. Rhodes fell in 653, and by 698 AD the whole of North Africa was lost. In 711 Muslims from Tangier crossed into Spain, set their sights on France, and by 720 AD Narbonne had fallen. Bordeaux was stormed and its churches burnt in 732. As Gibbon emphasised, only the resistance at Poitiers of Charles Martel in 732 saved Europe from occupation, and arrested the Muslim tide.

From 800 on, incursions into Italy began. In 846 a Saracen force of 10,000 landed in Ostia, assaulted Rome, and sacked and desecrated the Basilicas of St Peter and St Paul. In 859 they seized the whole of Sicily. After capturing a fortress near Anzio, Muslim forces “plundered the surrounding countryside for forty years”. In southern France at the end of the ninth century they held a base near Toulon from which they ravaged both Provence and Northern Italy, and controlled the passes over the Alps, robbing and murdering pilgrims on their way to Rome. Genoa was attacked in 934 and taken in 935. In 1015 Sardinia was taken, occupied, and held my Muslim forces until 1050.

In 1076 the Seljuk Turkish capture of Jerusalem finally exhausted the patience of Islam’s victims in Christian Europe. Only then were concerted moves begun to drive back the infidel, launch the First Crusade, and retake Jerusalem.


Israel still has another 403 years to go before they can legitimately take the fight to Islam. That gives Israel's neighbors 403 years to perfect their rocket-making skills... 403 years to rain said rockets down upon innocent men women and children... 403 years for Israel's enemies to develop and acquire nuclear or, God forbid, worse technologies just so they can annihilate an ethnicity that WANT's to live in peace with its neighbors... Hmmm.

What about America? If we consider the start of hostilities between Islam and the U.S. to have begun, say, with the Iranian Hostage Crisis in 1979, America still has 434 before she can legitimately take the fight to Islam. So what that some 3000 people were murdered by Islam on 9/11. We still have 434 years before precedent says we can strike back. Bush therefore is a war criminal. This administration is guilty of war crimes against the Religion of Peace. Even then we won't be immune from the criticism of ignorants.

But let's classify that word here and now. Ignorant, i.e., uninformed in terms of what should be basic historical knowledge and reference.

Those who want to accuse Christianity of having been equally horrific in its past, toward Islam, aren't taking into consideration the number 463. Not because two wrongs don't make a right, but because they're ignorant of the first wrong. Christian Europe showed 463 years of restraint. Islam is lawless and knows no restraint. But again, two wrongs don't make a right. We must learn to understand Muslims before we can deal with them fairly or justly. Never mind that they consider such, in us, as a weakness to exploit.

No one, however, has suggested Muslims learn to understand us. For 463 years Islam didn't care to understand Europe, Africa, or Asia Minor. When they were driven back they still didn't care to understand. All they understood was that they were driven back by infidels. Christian Europe. Infidels. Islam licked its wounds and bided its time. And that time is now.

The question now is, do we wait another 434 years to deal with Islam as they have dealt with us?

Or do we create a new precedent?


1 Comment:

  1. Marshal Art said...
    Uh, I vote, "new precedent". The sooner the better.

Post a Comment