Politics, Crusades, And Today. - by preston/prestome UngYoBrock

The comparison with the Historical Crusades, with modern day war. Featuring Isis, American Historians, American President Obama, The Quran, Massacres, Bible, France, Gold, Killing Jesus, Jerusalem.

Politics Crusades And Today: 2015-2018

By, Professor Prestome Ungyobrock

 

 

      This sentence here is the warning for those who are reading it. In the year 2015 there are professional historians engaging in our current hypocritical government’s religious politics. In these debates government ideals are being ignored and religious ideology is being debated instead.. This results in a failure of government and the failure to separate church and state.  The funny part is that this article is in response to fools that still believe in the same nonsense today, the same sort of fools with the same mind set of fools a thousand years ago 1000CE. Thus this paper will also tell about Christian’s faith, since that is the subject matter of these debates. I am not religious, in any shape or form. I’ve spent my entire life telling again and again, too those who complain to me about their religions. That I am not interested; most will never understand. Parts of my family still do not just like how most people who do not. I was 22-23 when I wrote this, and have spent over 10 years continuously telling everyone including certain family members. My thoughts and opinions on their idiotic morals that I was forced to grow up learning. To get to the point, with religious belief comes ignorance. Today’s debates in 2018 are just like the debates from 2015 regarding, the war on Muslims, there is a repeating historical event: a debate that has been in process since September 9/2011 to say the least. Christians say this war is not their fault and is a war against Muslims because they attacked first: which isn’t really correct. Regardless, It is very clear that not all Muslims are to blame, but Religious/Military officials tend to over look this fact. Just like how the crusades, a topic that is still being debated nearly 1000 years later. As said by David Perry, a historian I tend to agree with, (at least more than a historian named Thomas F. Madden): David Perry debates that Christian action was not justifiable in the age of the crusades.

 

     What I write is a bit bolder and comes from a different view point then Obama and his deteriorating Christian view that has so many upset. So many just focus on that idea that his faith might be fading away and for such he is put on a pedestal for political debates. Every word he/Obama says is judged by religious views that judge when faiths rules are not in mind before making any action. Each religion feels that their rules are absolute; rules that are above the rules of the states. Thus Christian faith as well as Museum faith is not being put aside during state debates. These faiths have been long since been ruining debates about what is justifiable or not according to their text instead of the rules that are supposed to be: by the people for the people. Since ‘Christian faith’ as well as ‘Museum faith’, have historical content even when religion is considered a myth: and is not a justifiable reference to base decisions off of. Typically, the involvement of Faith being involved in history content is because of wars that are caused by conflicting religious ideals. Such as Source 6 that says to Obama’s ideas in regards to Christians being part of the blame: “Your argument makes no sense,” Beck remarked. “Please, Mr. President Obama, pipe down(shut up)” (6). This argument this man is making is directly related to the president’s remarks on religion, it is not supported by any facts or anything. When historically the Christians/Catholics have instigated large scale conflict and these groups also failed to reprent any sort of previous conflict these Western religious Groups caused.. Meanwhile both Tom Madden and David Perry agree that people commit terrible deeds in the name of religion. Yet people don’t understand this, or look at their selves who are doing the acts that their own religion is against. 

 

     I understand this point regarding committing terrible deeds in the name of religion since Christians are stereo-typically all ignorant. For an example that everyone has heard before: when a few Christians get physically hurt. Some even killed by people (religious or not) the Christians want to go out and hurt the attackers 10x (ten times) more. How is that Christian? Yet most people don’t understand this, or look at themselves when they are doing what their own religion is against. If they do they just expect forgiveness for knowingly breaking the rules of their religion. In this state of mind I have now put you in: It is easy to see how the crusades can be brought up into a topic of political debate in 2015. The historians are trying to tell about Christian violence by relating it to the crusades. Such as source 4 shown at the end of the article, that says, “We would generally agree that the crusades, were Christian acts of Violence”. As seen today with the never ending war in Iraq, Christians are angry at another religion yet again. When this group of myth loving cultists are angry, people die, to uncountable numbers. Like in the crusades, a time period where the same religious groups were fighting to almost no end. This is one of the stories, “I passed by them and saw the limbs of the fallen on the field of battle, Scattered in pieces over the site of the encounter, lacerated and disjointed, with heads cracked open, throats slit, spines broken, necks shattered, feet in pieces, noses mutilated, extremities torn off, members dismembered, throats shredded, eyes gouged out, stomachs disemboweled, tummys torn off, hair colored with blood, the praecordium slashed, joints dislocated.” (2 Allen and Emilie Amt). This single sentence continues on longer, but my point being, is that through all that blood; more this time if war gets worse. Just like last time both (Muslim/Christian) religions’ god (the exact same one) won’t be there, nor will he/she be honoring murders for their actions. If she/he/it was there, why would everyone be dead? Which I feel is more the point Obama was trying to make; that these religious wars have nothing to gain but death, for both sides.  The point is that like in the Crusades, the church is angry at the Muslims yet again. A now repeating time period where the same religious groups are fighting again it may never have an end. This is the point that is being missed, and is what Obama is trying to say but those who are arguing are missing it. This is an example of the death we are nearly facing yet again After all, that entire concept is only a slight part of why: I am not religious. Sometimes it takes a mutual third party to see what the other parties don’t see. None of the so called true (whatever religion you as the reader are, insert it here), are really true to the religion they go around saying they believe in. Honor thy neighbor, but yet they kill each other. The most annoying part is that the religions’ never truly have been true to their beliefs unfortunately.

 

     For those who do not know, Christians and other religions typically justify their actions by an outdated book that means nothing but firewood for me. The Quran is just a book that came after the Christian/Jewish Bible, neither being a concept that is worth killing over. “The people hasten to the rescue, baring with them the cross of the Lord, that cross which, in memory of the passion of Christ, who was nailed to it, and which thus purchased the redemption of the human race, was regarded as the most secure rampart to be opposed to the attacks of the infidels. The conflict begins; our brethren are conquered: the holy cross falls into the hands of the enemies; the king is made prisoner, the bishops are massacred.” (2 Allen and Emilie Amt). Where is the honor in that? “The greatest kings of the Middle ages, men like Richard the Lionheart of England and St. Louis IX of Fance, were ardent Crusaders and as a result were hailed as heroes.”(3 Thomas F. Madden). As much as heroes they maybe, I can’t help but wonder: is that the only cornerstone people can find to justify their actions? The only positive aspect those who support war can focus on? If you didn’t know like how Thomas F. Madden does not seem too. The crusades were about territory and religious war. The crusades were not an honorable war; it was full of ignorant unorganized pillaging fools. These are the same fools that are honored today. There are many more people who deserve greater honor then those of the crusade in my opinion. The funny part is that this article is in response to fools that still believe in the same nonsense today as the fools a thousand years ago. Proof that even those who study history do not recognize that history repeats itself, since people don’t learn the lessons history offers.

 

     Why are these public debates only focusing on who started what and who is defending what? This is the same never ending ongoing debate that everyone has been hearing for years, yet this time there is no group against both sides of the war. Trying to see it for what it is, without religion clouding their opinions. This state’s politician positions are filled with religious individuals, even Historians like David and Tom focus on religious points. When reading a book like the ones shown in the sources here; it is important to understand who is telling the story. If a Christian is telling their side of the story it will insult/be biased to the other side. Since the story will focus on their personal horrors and beliefs on the situation, which is against the other side: the automatically bad side. This is a topic of war after all, honor is what many crusaders were seeking, since they were looking to control not only land/gold but to have complete spiritual authority. Countless bodies from every side die in these battles, for the idea of who has the higher spiritual belief. All the killing just to attempt to show what god is the stronger one. As if that wasn’t enough many die trying to prove slightly different ideas on the same religious concepts true.  This concept to kill for religion is nonsense, and is only a slight part of why: I am not religious. Killing for a belief that does not matter is annoying! To do so is against both religions and nothing can be done about it since everyone is focusing on religious topics. Killing for a belief that does not matter to someone who is not religious is annoying for them; after all they have no choice but to be subjected to all the death if they don’t die themselves.

 

       It is difficult not to focus on religion, when politics and even well diverse historians are after all everywhere you go there are ignorant religious informants. However the main issue is the informants who set up booths are only there for their religion. Not others, the typical religion that is on the streets protesting their beliefs, are Christians. These hypocritical Christians persist on shoving their religion down your throat, no matter the cost. There is no new information; I have heard it all before. So why are they there, again and again and again? Yet, if another religion sets up a peaceful booth nearby: guess what? That particular religion is tormented by Christians. Who continue to do so despite their own beliefs to respect their neighbor non less try to love, as there book so does say. This is the place I have grown up in. And yes I absolutely refuse to partake in the stupidity of theses cults, and once again like in the crusades. I am not waiting around for false profits and same fake savor to come and save me. Like Peter Bartholomew (lived during the Crusades) who, even during the time of the crusades was suspected to have planted a fake holy item by Adhemar. Since people had already herd the ‘holy’ item was already in Constantinople, somewhere they were not. Anyways Peter acts like he finds this ‘holy’ item: a lance head that killed Jesus, the person of their faith. He does this to try and raise the hopes of the foolish crusaders. Though I don’t see how an item that killed the idol of their faith would be a ‘holy’ item and not a curse upon both Christians and Islam. “With the siege machinery in readiness, the assault on Jerusalem began on the night of July 13-1^4th" (1 Thomas F Madden). A foolish battle for control of a land that has nothing but the circulated roomer of ‘holiness’.  I am better off without one of these so called heroes, all this church and state ideology should leave me out of it. For the politicians and other fools that are too busy idolizing fools, I want to conclude this paper by reminding them that church and state are supposed to be separate.

 

Just like in 2015, I refuse to partake in the stupidity of theses cults, and debates on outdated religious morals. Once again 2015 is similar to the crusades, if certain people don’t take some chill pills. Then countless numbers will die again waiting around for some false prophets/fake savors to come and save them. Like Peter Bartholomew who, even during the time of the crusades was suspected to have planted a fake holy item by Adhemar. Since people had already herd the ‘holy’ item was already in Constantinople, somewhere they were not. Peter acts like he finds this ‘holy’ item: a lance head that killed Jesus, the person of their faith. He does this to try and raise the hopes of the foolish crusaders. Though I don’t see how an item that killed the idol of their faith would be a ‘holy’ item and not a curse upon both Christians and Islam. “With the siege machinery in readiness, the assault on Jerusalem began on the night of July 13-14th^" (1 Thomas F Madden) A foolish battle for control of a land that has nothing but the circulated roomer of ‘holiness’ and stupidity.  I am better off without one of these so called heroes, and nearly pointless religious centers, all this church and state ideology should leave me out of it. For the religious politicians that are too busy idolizing fools who don’t know church and state are supposed to be separate. Not this mess of hypocritical government’s religious politics.

 

 

 

Sources

 

1. The Concise History of the Crusades by Thomas F Madden. Page used is 32.

2. The Crusades, A Reader, Second Edition edited by SJ Allen and Emilie Amt. Page 154 is used for reference along with page 160

3. Getting Medieval, Thomas F. Madden 2015. Article.

4.Crusades and religion - Who decides what is “True” Crusading , David Perry. 2015. Article.

5.  Judge Jeanine Pirro Opening Statement �" the Obama at Prayer Breakfast 2015. Video.

6. Impulsive People Lead Everyone to get involved in War: Example: Vietnam. + Tea. A Less-Judgmental Perspective, World History. Professor Prestome Ungyobrock. Book. 2017.

 

Author's Note

Find my free websites at imortalone.weebly.com and imortalone.wordpress.com

I wrote this in 2015. Was posted on the site called triond. That site is no more.

- Religious belief comes ignorance.