Go to first unread
Back
to top
The TRUTH About The Crusades
Watch
Announcements
Were the Crusades an unprovoked act of aggression on behalf of bloodthirsty Christians? Did the First Crusade mark the beginning of close to a millennium of hostility between Christianity and Islam, or did the conflict begin centuries earlier?
Stefan Molyneux takes a closer look at the historical background of the Crusades and presents shocking information that is often hidden from the general population. What is the truth about the origins of the Crusades?
3
reply
Report
#2
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
Were the Crusades an unprovoked act of aggression on behalf of bloodthirsty Christians? Did the First Crusade mark the beginning of close to a millennium of hostility between Christianity and Islam, or did the conflict begin centuries earlier?
Stefan Molyneux takes a closer look at the historical background of the Crusades and presents shocking information that is often hidden from the general population. What is the truth about the origins of the Crusades?
Were the Crusades an unprovoked act of aggression on behalf of bloodthirsty Christians? Did the First Crusade mark the beginning of close to a millennium of hostility between Christianity and Islam, or did the conflict begin centuries earlier?
Stefan Molyneux takes a closer look at the historical background of the Crusades and presents shocking information that is often hidden from the general population. What is the truth about the origins of the Crusades?
0
reply
Report
#3
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Who hides this information?
Who hides this information?
0
reply
Report
#4
(Original post by MrKmas508)
This is what happens when one side has an agenda meanwhile the other doesn't care. People will believe anything they're told these days, some people are more prone to it than others.
This is what happens when one side has an agenda meanwhile the other doesn't care. People will believe anything they're told these days, some people are more prone to it than others.
2
reply
(Original post by MrKmas508)
This is what happens when one side has an agenda meanwhile the other doesn't care. People will believe anything they're told these days, some people are more prone to it than others.
This is what happens when one side has an agenda meanwhile the other doesn't care. People will believe anything they're told these days, some people are more prone to it than others.
1
reply
Report
#6
Not gonna watch because its bloody long but its pretty obvious the motivation of the crusades.
0
reply
Report
#7
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
The only people who go on about the crusades other than historians are sexually frustrated Muslims.
The only people who go on about the crusades other than historians are sexually frustrated Muslims.
0
reply
Report
#8
(Original post by MrKmas508)
Imagine having to see Islamic terrorism everyday and then tell yourself it has nothing to do with your religion. It must be exhausting.
Imagine having to see Islamic terrorism everyday and then tell yourself it has nothing to do with your religion. It must be exhausting.
It only seems to upset backward looking idiots.
0
reply
Report
#9
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
What happened 700 years ago in Jerusalem doesn't have an impact on modern day society.
It only seems to upset backward looking idiots.
What happened 700 years ago in Jerusalem doesn't have an impact on modern day society.
It only seems to upset backward looking idiots.
0
reply
Report
#10
(Original post by MrKmas508)
What are you talking about, the crusades completely justify the ongoing annihilation of the Yezidis and the systematic persecution of middle eastern Christians across Levant. Obviously.
What are you talking about, the crusades completely justify the ongoing annihilation of the Yezidis and the systematic persecution of middle eastern Christians across Levant. Obviously.
Of brainless morons massacring people because they're different.
Organisations like ISIS are quite happy to kill Muslims as well.
Or are you trying to find an excuse for so Many people I the Middle East and followers of Islam for failing to embrace modernity?
0
reply
Report
#11
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Or maybe it's just a group
Of brainless morons massacring people because they're different.
Organisations like ISIS are quite happy to kill Muslims as well.
Or are you trying to find an excuse for so Many people I the Middle East and followers of Islam for failing to embrace modernity?
Or maybe it's just a group
Of brainless morons massacring people because they're different.
Organisations like ISIS are quite happy to kill Muslims as well.
Or are you trying to find an excuse for so Many people I the Middle East and followers of Islam for failing to embrace modernity?
0
reply
Report
#12
(Original post by Cato the Elder)
Stefan Molyneux
Stefan Molyneux
Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Report
#13
(Original post by MyGayDadRapedMe)
You're pathetic.
You're pathetic.
0
reply
Report
#15
The worst part about the crusades is that both sides didn't completely wipe out the other sides religion.
3
reply
Report
#16
(Original post by MyGayDadRapedMe)
But Christianity is actually a good religion based upon the golden rule and peaceful living. Islam is a horrible religion.
But Christianity is actually a good religion based upon the golden rule and peaceful living. Islam is a horrible religion.
0
reply
Report
#17
(Original post by MyGayDadRapedMe)
You can't deal with the arguments or the elucidation of real historical facts so you resort to the typical leftist tactic of attacking the man (by the means of two fallacies) rather than dealing with the arguments.
You can't deal with the arguments or the elucidation of real historical facts so you resort to the typical leftist tactic of attacking the man (by the means of two fallacies) rather than dealing with the arguments.
If you want specific examples:
- For a start, we're talking about generic power politics between states for the most part, rather than some monolithic struggle between Christianity and Islam: both Christian and Muslim states fought among themselves about as much as they fought each other, if not more so.
- He mentions that previously 'Christian lands' were conquered by Muslim empires, but not that those lands became 'Christian lands' usually because they were conquered by Christian empires, or by pagan kingdoms who then converted to Christianity.
- He mentions Islamic slavery but not Christian slavery - in fact he goes as far as to deny that Christians were even involved in slavery at all until 1519, which is a flat-out lie - slavery was widespread and common in the Byzantine Empire, and throughout Europe - according to the Domesday Book, 10% of England's population were slaves in the 11th Century. Venice was a hub of slave traders.
2
reply
Report
#18
(Original post by MyGayDadRapedMe)
It's a more objective analysis that the one we usually get from the media or the universities following the agenda which is to not even mention specifics not mention the 4 centuries of Jihad prior to the first Crusade and whine about the poor Muslims and talk about how evil Christians or whites are. You'd probably fit in there.
It's a more objective analysis that the one we usually get from the media or the universities following the agenda which is to not even mention specifics not mention the 4 centuries of Jihad prior to the first Crusade and whine about the poor Muslims and talk about how evil Christians or whites are. You'd probably fit in there.
Well duh. This doesn't even contradict anything he even said. It's only a 27 minute video.
.
The fact is that Islam was more unified in one aim in a way that Christianity wasn't - which is Jihad against the infidel.
It only took 100 years for Islam rule over massive portions of the old world - nothing comparable happened with Christianity or the Roman Empire
- it took much longer to spread because it wasn't almost entirely violent as Islam's spread certainly was.
That has to be one of the most ******ed arguments I've ever seen. So the Christians of Syria should just accept their dhimmitude, mass murder, slavery etc. because obviously the fact that the Syrians were pagans or Zoroastrians and then converted to Christianity means that the Syrian Christians have no right to call anywhere home and defend themselves. How didn't I see the impeccable logic!
On this point I will conceded that he is wrong to say that Christians weren't involved in slavery. They were to a lesser extent (particularly in Western Europe) and slavery was banned in England since the 12th century.
In any case the point about slavery is that for the Europeans and/or Christians, it was another reason to want to start a Crusade to protect themselves as their coasts were constantly attacked by Muslims slavers and pirates with their people sold into one of the most brutal forms of slavery that has ever existed. It's natural to expect a response to this even if it was too late or not as successful as a mentally healthy European might have hoped.
Do you have anything to back up you claim that Islamic slavery in the Dark/Middle Ages was " one of the most brutal forms of slavery that has ever existed"?
So what is the appropriate response to this aggression, this Jihad then? Curl into the fetus position and beg for forgiveness? Do you think the Crusades were morally wrong then? If so was the previous Jihad or subsequent Jihad against the Christian world and Europe worse?
0
reply
Report
#19
Seen a few videos of his even though he's an atheist he's not a militant one like most on the internet
0
reply
Report
#20
(Original post by Party Hard)
Seen a few videos of his even though he's an atheist he's not a militant one like most on the internet
Seen a few videos of his even though he's an atheist he's not a militant one like most on the internet
0
reply
X
Quick Reply
