Subversive Phrase of the Day
Tags: Phrase of the Day.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
A bit of an antidote to Obama’s speech yesterday:
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Christendom might quite reasonably have been alarmed if it had not been attacked. But as a matter of history it had been attacked. The Crusader would have been quite justified in suspecting the Moslem even if the Moslem had merely been a new stranger; but as a matter of history he was already an old enemy. The critic of the Crusade talks as if it had sought out some inoffensive tribe or temple in the interior of Thibet, which was never discovered until it was invaded. They seem entirely to forget that long before the Crusaders had dreamed of riding to Jerusalem, the Moslems had almost ridden into Paris. – G K Chesterton
Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
14 Responses to “Subversive Phrase of the Day”
Caucus of Corruption
I’m hoping the rest of Chesterton’s reasoning is a bit more sound than this (I am still planning on reading Orthodoxy, though I haven’t had a chance to yet). Claiming that the Crusades were justified by events that had happened centuries earlier is like claiming that the Sack of Rome would justify Italy invading Germany.
There aren’t 100 learned men in Great Britain that take Chesterton seriously.
Not enough spelling mistakes
mdr
lead,
I highly doubt that you even know 100 learned men in Great Britain. But thanks for your “opinion”
the issue is moot…unless you take to the revisionism of history as a glimpse of reality…which is essentially what SA tries to do…showing the convoluted distortion of liberal thinking…as a almost pure example of why we should never take them seriously…
“Claiming that the Crusades were justified by events that had happened centuries earlier is like claiming…..” that black hatred of whites is justified by events that had happened nearly two centuries earlier.
And so on………….
Careful, Sergei—-the justification for all sorts of Liberal Looniness depends on dredging up ancient grievances. You don’t want to undermine that foundation of Liberal attack politics, do you? You’d have to quit protesting Columbus Day parades and vilifying pretty much all Europeans for their various travels and colonizations. You’d have to stop scouring history for the actions of the few so you could demonize the many.
We wouldn’t want a radical Lefty ideologue to appear to be inconsistent, would we?
But thanks, econ, for grandiosely speaking for the “learned men” of Britain. Doesn’t this pomposity remind you of someone….?
in reality, the pope failed to aid several mideastern christian nations as the sword of mohammad fell upon them…and only when the threat of the byzantine empire became reality….did he do anything about it…
like the guy said…muslims were marching on paris…long before the first christian knight entered jerusalem….turrning the table and representing the crusades as an evil act by christians only means that you pretend you actually have a grasp on the truth…except…you omit the fact that it happened for cause…
the fact is…if christians did not fight muslims…the ottoman empire would have included the entire european continent…the muslim crusades began in the 6th century before mohammad died…and they did not stop until the fall of the ottoman empire…the attrocities your liberal revisionists omit from your sad lies about history exposes a brutal, bloody and savage history far, far worse than anything on this earth…
and today…you morons want to appease them…
we seem destined to fight a war our fathers already won…because of your ignorance…
See? He added one word, and it was misspelled.
I told you you forgot the spelling mistakes.
what that a drug induced stupor….or the drip drip drip of gonorhea frenchstudent?
creativity gets an F…context gets an F….and as far as spelling mythstakes go…what use is good grammar and proper spelling when you are lying your arse off anyway?
Sergei,
Errrmmm….but the proximate cause of the Crusades wasn’t the Moslem invasion of France in the 8th century, but the Moslem invasion of Christian Byzantium in the 11th century…had the Byzantines won at Manzikert in 1071, there likely never would have been a Crusade in 1099. Chesterton was merely pointing out that the Crusades didn’t just happen – they were the result of a long series of events, mostly involving entirely unprovoked Moslem attacks on Christian nations. It was only in 1091 that Sicily was retaken from the Moslems.
Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, Morroco, Tunisia, Algeria, Jordan…these were all once upon a time Christian nations, Sergie, and only the brutal and unprovoked attack by Moslems seeking plunder, rape and slaves caused them to cease being Christian.
lead,
All learned men in Britain take Chesterton seriously…if you have someone in Britain who doesn’t, he isn’t learned.
“You’d have to quit protesting Columbus Day parades…” No need to protest Columbus Day parades. No one comes anymore. They’ve all been canceled.
Also, he needs to point out that I’m a 24 year old sophomore at the University of Michigan.
Actually, I do. If you would bother to take a look at my actual positions and beliefs, rather than the cardboard cutout of Cthulhu that you assume all who do not agree with you must be, you would know that I’m a Radical Centrist, committed to civil discourse, cooperation, and the reintroduction of reality to American politics.
Then that’s what he should have mentioned. The fact that the Muslims had invaded Francia once upon a time was not a reason for the Crusades. The fact that the Seljuqs were marching on Constantinople was.
Regarding Chesterton, I’ve started reading Orthodoxy. It’s very good, and there are a number of interesting parallels between his own philosophical ideas and my own, though they’re articulated in very different terms.