Last edited by other; 01-18-11 at 01:24 PM.
The fact is that there was no threat posed by Islam to Western Europe at the time of the Crusades, nor had there been a threat to Western Europe posed by Muslim invaders since the Battle of Tours, period. I appreciate your wikipedia research, though, keep it up. You might eventually learn something
Last edited by Guy Incognito; 01-18-11 at 01:39 PM.
You changed your post, so I'll respond to your misrepresentations here too...
Yeah, and why do you think that was the case? Sicily and Apulia, like spain, had been conquered by muslim invaders. They were all previously christian lands. But of course, because you say so, such incursions were perceived as no threat, of course...At the time, southern Italy and Spain were culturally steeped in Islam.
Why do you think the Pope incited the Normans, the christianized descendants of the hated vikings, to come and take sicily and apulia, which they then held for centuries?
Oh, they weren't invaders, so the previous christian inhabitants of southern italy and sicily invited muslims to come rule over them? And good neighbors sack each others' cities and no one is alarmed by that?These were not invaders, they were neighbors.
And you call me an apologist?
I already stated that they viewed the accounts of attacks on christian pilgrims as a threat and an injustice that needed to be fixed.And it had absolutely nothing to do with Jerusalem. None of it can be viewed as sufficient provocation for the Crusades.
Why do you insist on ignoring 90% of the latin/muslim context in the 400 years leading up to the crusades? Again, and you accuse me of "sweepin things under the rug."
You're actually correct here, but then again, who said otherwise?The fact is the Crusades were a war of conquest.
I've already addressed this incorrect assumption.The fact is that there was no threat posed by Islam to Western Europe at the time of the Crusades, nor had there been a threat to Western Europe posed by Muslim invaders since the Battle of Tours, period.
Last edited by other; 01-18-11 at 02:28 PM.
OK thanks, I wasn't aware that Africa had a "Christian terrorist" problem.
However, I have a few caveats... if they're really engaging in some of the things they're accused of, then they are so far gone from anything like Christianity that they don't deserve the title.
For another thing, it is still a comparison of BB's to Buckshot, in terms of quantity.
Fiddling While Rome Burns
Carthago Delenda Est
"I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."
Islam is far more pushy. First of all we have many world nations that have an Islamic government that pushes Islam on the populace. You also see in these countries a huge violation of freedom of religion. Many of these countries persecute Christians, have laws against proselytizing, kill those who leave Islam, and all sorts of things. To my knowledge no Christian theocracy does this (or if one even exists).
Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
Most Islamics feel the same way about their terrorists.However, I have a few caveats... if they're really engaging in some of the things they're accused of, then they are so far gone from anything like Christianity that they don't deserve the title.
I think that Christian extremists are killing about as many people annually as Islamic extremists are. There is just less reporting on it because it's in Africa and other 3rd world countries.For another thing, it is still a comparison of BB's to Buckshot, in terms of quantity.