SomaliNet Forums

If we consider all Christians to be one entity, fighting and scouring to survive, then the inherent and instinctive act to defend one's existence, aggressively or otherwise, is the core of being. Everyone wants to rule. War existed before humanity, we shouldn't be surprised if it existed till Isa brought it all to the table and told every diverging sect to shut it.

On a less abstract note, trying not to individualize the intentions; they fought for wealth and power, we fought for Islam. Simple as.

Shirib wrote:Crusaders were barbaric and we weren't...the crusaders killed everyone after they captured Jerusalem including Christians

This is actually not true but then you're not really interested in the truth, are you? Islamic Jihadists were as violent and barbaric as their Crusader counterparts. Afterall, they both lived in the Middle Ages when brutal violence and barbarism was the rule not the exception.

NoAngst wrote:

Shirib wrote:Crusaders were barbaric and we weren't...the crusaders killed everyone after they captured Jerusalem including Christians

This is actually not true but then you're not really interested in the truth, are you? Islamic Jihadists were as violent and barbaric as their Crusader counterparts. Afterall, they both lived in the Middle Ages when brutal violence and barbarism was the rule not the exception.

What is not true, that the crusaders nearly killed everyone in Jerusalem whether Muslim, Jew or Christian? Or are you saying Muslims did the same thing when they captured cities?

James Dahl wrote:Religion should be about philosophy and law, not swords guns and death. Defending your religion is one thing, but attacking other people because they have a different religion or to advance your religion, that's sort of going against what religion is supposed to be about in the first place.

Shirib wrote:

NoAngst wrote:

Shirib wrote:Crusaders were barbaric and we weren't...the crusaders killed everyone after they captured Jerusalem including Christians

This is actually not true but then you're not really interested in the truth, are you? Islamic Jihadists were as violent and barbaric as their Crusader counterparts. Afterall, they both lived in the Middle Ages when brutal violence and barbarism was the rule not the exception.

What is not true, that the crusaders nearly killed everyone in Jerusalem whether Muslim, Jew or Christian? Or are you saying Muslims did the same thing when they captured cities?

The Crusades did indeed kill everyone in Jerusalem but why are you focused only on Jerusalem? The Crusaders invaded other cities that were spared the fate the befell Jerusalem and other cities that met the same fate as Jerusalem. The point is that back in those days wanton killings, slave taking, forceable conversions were the norm. Muslims did it. Christians it. And even the Jews when they were creating their own kingdoms.

To expect Muslims were better than other invaders is simply proposterous.

Muslims were better, they had code and honor unheard of at that time. They spared children, women and the old. Men were fair game

MashaAllah, thank u all for your contributions dear Baboons

Most of you believe that Crusade was only against Islamdom when in fact It was also against Waaqist East European Tribes!

We all agree that jihad is just an Arabic word for a self defense by a community from outside attack or a community expanding its territory or influence on its neighbours. In fact its a self preserving mechanism that any political entity possess!
So what is religious about jihad?


B.

Garaad_LQ wrote:bantu bareento
are you Muslim or Animist ?

My dear brother in bantudom, I am Muslim!
But i do not despise my ancetors religion! in fact i am sentimentally attached to it!
I know some Waaqist prayers. and it is so touching and so innocent! They pray for peace , peace for human beings, peace for Earth, for animals for Trees and everything ...
Calling The Allmighty subxaana wa tacaalaa, Waaq, Eebbee, Allah or Jehova doesnt matter as long u r revering the same God and do not add shirk

Lately I read an amazing text from an outstanding somali intellectual who proposed to make prayers in Somali! Masha Allah!
Imagine if he had succeede;
imagine if we all knew the meaning of the prayer words we would have been better people.
(although arabs know it and they r bad people! very very bad people )

B.

^ you have the mentality of Ataturk who tried to change salah language to Turkish, alxamdullilah his people did not let him do that.
you wanna understand what you're saying? go learn the language of your Prophet (saw), simple really.

As for the topic i respect the crusaders, even tho they were barbaric they had the balls to say it like it is unlike today where "war on terror" is used when we all know it is infact "war on islam".
The mujahideen were my heroes however now all we have is flower governments seating on America's lap.

crusaders respected the war code and never harmed the women and children. there main goal was to protect peaceful societies from external aggression. i admire them AND I CONSIDER MYSELF A MODERN DAY CRUSADER

Crusader Meru, Godefroid de Bouillon would have taken you for the devil and killed u, or at least ran away from you ...because you are MelanoDerme

B.

Meru wrote:crusaders respected the war code and never harmed the women and children. there main goal was to protect peaceful societies from external aggression. i admire them AND I CONSIDER MYSELF A MODERN DAY CRUSADER

Crusaders never begged in their wars, yet here you are in Somalinet begging to be accepted and you got the nerves to claim to be a crusader.

Here enjoy..

Meru wrote:crusaders respected the war code and never harmed the women and children. there main goal was to protect peaceful societies from external aggression. i admire them AND I CONSIDER MYSELF A MODERN DAY CRUSADER

Shirib wrote:

Meru wrote:crusaders respected the war code and never harmed the women and children. there main goal was to protect peaceful societies from external aggression. i admire them AND I CONSIDER MYSELF A MODERN DAY CRUSADER

i think he should be banned for that comment

Most of the Crusades were laughable. The Fourth was disastrous:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Crusade

"The Latin soldiery subjected the greatest city in Europe to an indescribable sack. For three days they murdered, raped, looted and destroyed on a scale which even the ancient Vandals and Goths would have found unbelievable. Constantinople had become a veritable museum of ancient and Byzantine art, an emporium of such incredible wealth that the Latins were astounded at the riches they found. Though the Venetians had an appreciation for the art which they discovered (they were themselves semi-Byzantines) and saved much of it, the French and others destroyed indiscriminately, halting to refresh themselves with wine, violation of nuns, and murder of Orthodox clerics. The Crusaders vented their hatred for the Greeks most spectacularly in the desecration of the greatest Church in Christendom. They smashed the silver iconostasis, the icons and the holy books of Hagia Sophia, and seated upon the patriarchal throne a whore who sang coarse songs as they drank wine from the Church's holy vessels. The estrangement of East and West, which had proceeded over the centuries, culminated in the horrible massacre that accompanied the conquest of Constantinople. The Greeks were convinced that even the Turks, had they taken the city, would not have been as cruel as the Latin Christians. The defeat of Byzantium, already in a state of decline, accelerated political degeneration so that the Byzantines eventually became an easy prey to the Turks. The Crusading movement thus resulted, ultimately, in the victory of Islam, a result which was of course the exact opposite of its original intention.[26][27] According to Choniates, a prostitute was even set up on the Patriarchal throne.[28]"

Read the Wiki article. The background would make excellent material for a stand-up comic. Surely the truth is stranger than fiction.....