Oh, was it Crusaders who attacked the Christchurch mosques? I hadn’t realized.
Changing this logo, and certainly the team name is not long for this world, is a sign of the acceptance of the idea that Westerners should be ashamed of the Crusades. The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS proves otherwise. It demonstrates from primary sources that the Crusades were not a gratuitous imperialistic venture, but a late and small-scale defensive reaction to 450 years of imperialist jihad aggression that had conquered and Islamized what had been half of the Christian world, and threatened the life of the Christian empire, the Byzantine empire.
The West continues its cultural self-abnegation in the face of the chimera of “Islamophobia,” a propaganda neologism designed to make people ashamed of defending themselves and their homeland against a newly aggressive Islamic jihad.
“Super Rugby: Crusaders drop swords from logo following Christchurch mosque attacks,” New Zealand Herald, October 16, 2019 (thanks to Steven):
The Crusaders have made the first change in its re-brand after calls for the franchise to change its name following the Christchurch shootings.
The Crusaders announced earlier this year that they would be considering a change to their name and branding following the attacks that killed 50 people and left dozens injured, insisting the status quo is “no longer tenable”.
The name was seen as insensitive by many, given its links to the military campaigns launched by Christians against Muslims during the medieval period.
The branding and pre-game mascots, which feature knights riding on horseback in chainmail, waving swords and with crosses on their chests, also came under scrutiny.
Although the Crusaders name itself still stands, the Super Rugby champions have removed the swords from their logo online….
It is still unknown whether the franchise will go as far as changing its name, with opinion heavily divided among fans.
A petition opposing the name change received more than 25,000 signatures online.
NZ Rugby boss Steve Tew said at the time that the removal of medieval theme was an appropriate first step, but any further consideration of the brand needs to be broader than a response to one event.
“Even prior to 15 March, the Crusaders had signalled their intention to complete a brand review,” Tew said….
Angemon says
Weasel words.
Ignoramuses.
Del Rokosh says
New name – Christchurch dhimmis. The city will eventually be renamed Allaville.
Lotus says
All this story begins long before the Crusades. The question to ask is, who started the original hostilities?
The following is extracted from ‘Sword and Scimitar’ by Raymond Ibrahim. It’s abundantly clear who the instigator of centuries of conflict is: Muhammad.
// Around the time Muhammad was becoming master of Mecca, he sent a letter to Heraclius, the Christian emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire who had that same year just defeated the Persian Empire after decades of warring.
The heart of the prophet’s letter consisted of two Arabic words, aslam taslam—that is, “submit [to Islam] and have peace.” It was rejected.
Muhammad responded in 629 by sending an expeditionary force of some three thousand Arabs chanting “victory or martyrdom!” into Christian territory. The Romans, who for centuries considered their southern neighbors as leading a “beastly and blood-thirsty life,” met and defeated them at Mu’ta (east of Jordan, near Karak).
Then, sometime in 630, even as Heraclius was ceremoniously restoring to Jerusalem what the Persians had earlier captured—the True Cross, a relic found centuries earlier under Constantine and believed to consist of fragments of Christ’s cross—Muhammad declared eternal war on Christendom, as captured by Koran 9:29:
“Fight those among the People of the Book [Christians and Jews] who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth, until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.”
In other words, Islam’s three choices had come to Jews and Christians: either they converted, died fighting, or kept their religions by paying extortion money and accepting an inferior position as dhimmis in Muslim society.
Then, claiming that the Christians were planning on invading Arabia to snuff out Islam, Muhammad “preemptively” led some thirty thousand Muslims to Tabuk, along the Roman-Arabian border. They stayed there for some three weeks; no Romans came, and the Muslims caravanned back to Medina. Two years later, in 632, Muhammad was dead. //
gravenimage says
+1
Ben Slade Kennedy says
The Mohammedans have been the real Crusaders from the start, and remain so to this very day in their quest for “World Domination”.
Battle says
Angemon stated “ignoramuses.”
Angemon hits nail on head. Good.
Battle says
Robert Spencer hits nail on head. Good.
Battle says
Lotus hits nail on head. Good.
Rotem says
They should call themselves DHIMMIS, not Kiwis
NZ goes bye-bye 🙁
Eur says
Meanwhile, here in Spain, Muslims open oratories and mosques with the name of the military who led the invasion of the Iberian Peninsula and marked the end of the Visigothic kingdom and the beginning of Islamic rule, the Sharia and the Umayyad caliphate. Mosque tariq ibn ziyad Barcelona.
Is this not a provocation, offense, declaration of intent? In any museum in Spain where historical battles are explained appeals to concord, understanding and coexistence between peoples and cultures (for example in the museum of the navas of Tolosa). Muslims do not make self-criticism, their conquests remain holy, Fair and in the name of Alah. It is somewhat vomitive, there is no reciprocity, they are 100% supremacist.
Lotus says
The history of the Christian-Muslim struggle in the Iberian Peninsula is one of the most fascinating topics in history.
The heroic efforts of the Christians over many centuries should be known to every European schoolchild, because they need to know that our civilisation was only made possible by resisting Islam.
When we forget we become weak. What the Muslims used to have to fight for, they now get for free just by turning up at the border.
Eur says
Even the discovery of the new world had a lot to do with that historic clash of civilizations. The Europeans (Castilians, Aragonese, French, Portuguese …) had a very complicated road to the Indies on the eastern road and sought a route through the West. Who was in the East? Ottomans and their fucking caliphate.
Muslim countries still explain the story to children talking about good and bad, they really do not explain history, they indoctrinate.
elee says
Everyone who values our occidental freedoms should occasionally acknowledge a debt to the Portugese mariners who at least partially denied the Ottomans supremacy in the Indian Ocean. Battles were fought, men died. Who remembers them? Who remembers the heroes of Lepanto? What an irony that we should owe our liberties to soldiers of the Inquisition…… as cess
gravenimage says
Good exchange, eur, Lotus, and elee.
By the way, elee, I certainly remember–I just finished the book “1494” Stephen R. Bown, which covers a lot of this history (although, as is so grimly common these days, it rather downplays the savagery of Islam).
Tom_X says
I believe the more apt term is Tyrannical, if not Totalitarian… And in either sense, they support a belief system that is contradictory to the majority of Western Society, and law. But here we are now, with liberals who hate Christianity so much that they readily embrace those who worship Muhammed… and would usher in their own demise, or enslavement.
SAFI says
Yes Muslims are typically very proud of their Conquests they celebrate them and they brag about them. Not only that but they believe that what they conquered once in History (and was later liberated by infidels) remains forever “rightfully” theirs. That applies not only to “Palestine” and “Quds” but also for “Al Andalus” for the Balkans, for Sicily, for Crimea and more…
Lotus says
Europeans should be proud too. It is right to be proud of our ancestors’ resistance to Islam.
For some reason, Westerners these days have no pride in their civilisation. They feel guilty and think they need to apologise for their history and even for existing. That’s nonsense!
As for territorial claims, why should we give up what never belonged to the Muslims in the first place?
elee says
(1) My understanding is that Muslims divide the world into dar-es-salaam, (the realm of peace, meaning) the portion of the world currently subjugated, and dar-al-harb, (the world of war, meaning) the world yet to be subjugated. And within dar-al-harb, again as I understand it, there are (A) territories previously subjugated by Muslims, which it is the duty of every Muslim to reconquer, and (B) territories not previously subjugated by Muslims, which it is the duty of every Muslim to conquer. (2) If you believe our values are preferable, then surrender nothing to them. I am a proud western chauvinist and I will not apologise for creating the modern world.
elee says
Oh and compare the American ackowledgment of past wrongs to Native Americans and Africans enslaved, with the Turkish response to their Armenian genocide. Moral self-criticism and the resultant humility dont occur in Islam.
Lotus says
Elee, you are right about the shameful Turkish denial of the Armenian/Greek genocide.
Try going to Turkey and bringing up that issue – you won’t need to pay for a hotel because you’ll be in the slammer before nightfall.
GreekEmpress says
+1 Lotus and elee—great comments!
My ancestors were from Constantinople and Anatolia. They fought the Muslim hordes for hundreds of years. I have no problem defending the Crusades—
PS. FREE CONSTANTINOPLE!
Lotus says
GreekEmpress, it’s good that you don’t feel ashamed of your heritage.
What the Turks did is usually called the Armenian Genocide, but I always refer to it as the Armenian/Greek Genocide because of the hundreds of thousands of Greeks who were also killed or displaced. If we leave them out, we omit them from history.
It’s possible to treat them as separate genocides, but many historians see them as part of the same genocidal policy.
As many as 750,000 Greeks perished, but this shameful act gets very little notice these days, and the Turks are happy to keep it that way.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_genocide
gravenimage says
True–the Armenian Genocide also targeted Greek, Assyrian, and Levantine Christians–all Christians in Turkey and the greater Ottoman Empire. In terms of sheer numbers, the Armenians lost more than anyone–but they were far from the only victims.
FYI says
So, they prove themselves to be cowards:perhaps they SHOULD change their name to ..the Wussies:is that “sensitive” enough for the little flowers,the little wilting violets of “super rugby”?
It has a nice,touchy-feely,leftard-inspired ring to it, doesn’t it?
The Wussies.
And a nice fluffy teddy bear would make an ideal mascot for such a manly sport.
Nothing upsetting like a sword or chainmail.
I hope my kiwi relatives might consider boycotting them.
SAFI says
“The Dhimmis”… and their logo should be a kuffar slave bowing before a Muslim and offering the annual jizya payment
FYI says
I think the muslims should be riding on their backs like jockeys.
I remember the ANZACs:Now ,THEY were actual,real men.
Not frightened or upset at the sight of a..knife..or a sword..
I do think that a name change by the NZ crusaders rugby team to the Wussies would be apposite:wimpyish,emasculated,touchy-feely men,frightened and upset at the sight of such a manly thing as.. a sword.
FYI says
Once upon a time Rugby balls were made out of a pig’s bladder but nowadays they are synthetic:just as well,as muslims might then demand the sport be banned as “islamophobic” as we know how muslims are terrified of pigs.
In fact in islamic belief,Jesus{who of course is a muslim and couldn’t possibly be Jewish} will be returning to “kill all the pigs”{Sahih Bukhari vol 4 bk 60 no 3448}
Yes,that is official islamic teaching:such hatred of pigs allah has that he wants them all wiped out.
Emma says
they can replace the sword with a crochet needle!
Lotus says
No, a crochet needle is too sharp for them. They might hurt themselves, the little darlings.
Westman says
How many Islamic flags have images of swords? Uh, huh.
NZBloke says
Replace the sword with an AR-15
Thomas Richard says
The pussification continues……
Stephen says
I think a 21st century rugby team in the south Island of New Zealand (on the other side of the word) feel guilt for the 30,000 christians that were slaughtered when the Muslims were beaten back at the seige of Vienna in 1529 ..
I know those rugby marketing people feel very guilty ….
As a New Zealander, I’m ashamed of the sewage that came from the government, the police, the media and anyone else that got onto the “Christchurch bandwagon”, that same weekend 300 Christians were slaughtered and raped by MUSLIMS in Nigeria ….
And what appeared on television and in the media ????? ………… NOTHING
Jack Holan says
When is Saudi Arabia dropping the sword from its flag?
gravenimage says
New Zealand: Crusaders rugby team drops sword from logo because of Christchurch mosque massacres
………………….
What did this rugby team have to do with this crime? The perpetrator was not even a New Zealander.
No matter–the cringing appeasement of Islam by those who should know better continues.
Here’s their website, already sporting the mutilated logo:
https://crusaders.co.nz/?gclid=Cj0KCQjw6KrtBRDLARIsAKzvQIEfaOq2Ym3BWTH2VrBwh_vbA4UWwPiFDJldEoX7VukzOvgp1cgGJGAaAjfHEALw_wcB
Robert Mann says
The commercial Christchurch franchise using the brand ‘Crusaders’ has indeed been pressured by the media, and the general dhimmifying trend of Helen Clark’s protégé Ardern, to renounce their name. The context is a thorough lack of basic info on Islam, and in particular on the crusades which were indeed a counterattack after centuries of vicious jihadi aggression. The general message that we must grovel to Islam as if to apologise for the Christchurch mosques shootings will v likely bring about a rebranding of the franchise.
gravenimage says
Disgusting, Robert. Thank you for that background.
Trick_or_Treat says
Sorry if this might ‘offend’ some snowflakes and delicate petals but I’m not the least little bit ashamed about the crusades – as a matter of a fact for the last two years now I’ve been sporting two Knights Templar Crusades battle flag ensigns in the corners of my vehicle’s rear window. If muslims happen to find these ‘offensive’, then that’s what they are there for, and I don’t mind ‘offending’ them at all. Likewise, and vice versa, the SUV getting around town with the ‘SHARIA’ number plates (and little simitar sword window sticker) annoys the absolute shit out of me too.
My late father [ ex British RAF ] used to get terribly annoyed about all these people doing their righteous song and dance about what they claim was our supposed ‘unnecessary’ and ‘criminal’ bombing of Dresden. The bombing of Dresden, incidently, was in direct (and very swift) response to the Luftwaffe’s bombing of Coventry (and upon which night also my father was very nearly killed). Dad always used to insist that the only thing we did wrong with Germany, period, was, ‘We stopped bombing!’. He always insisted that there should not have ever been a ‘Germany’ in existence at all after all the guns fell silent, and after all the bombs stopped falling (you have to consider what they went through to understand such attitudes being held. There are many other Australian, New Zealand, and British returned servicemen who have held to their very last days that Japan should no longer exist).
Likewise, with the Crusades (and on account of what the whole world has been going through in lsyter days all because of this wretched and evil doctrine of islam) we only did one thing wrong – WE STOPPED. Perhaps we should have kept going then and there and wiped this evil and it’s unholy book completely from the face of the earth?!
Lastly, are muslims going to be asked to remove all the swords, and simitars, etc that are depicted on all their various flags, and emblems, and even on some of their product labels ? Or is that that somehow different? Do only muslims have some kind of mortgage on the right to propagate this kind of visual implied threat?
Will we soon see the lefty screech-monkeys getting all offended over the Sergeant at arms at the head of some of our military parades raising the sword in the air?
Phfffft!
Rob says
I wrote this to the Bishop of Christchurch in April. After a lengthy delay he replied with a one-liner: ‘It would not be helpful if I were to get involved in this matter’
Here’s my letter:
‘Your Grace
I am writing to you as the leader of the Anglican Church in Christchurch.
My concern is that calls to remove the name ‘Crusader’ and its attendant regalia and theatrics, is admitting ‘guilt by association’ for the recent Mosque killings.
I know of no written or video claim from the alleged perpetrator, that he was committing these deeds as a Christian act of faith. It seems to me, that whoever made the link, is in fact, engaging in an opportunistic effort to discredit our Christian heritage.
Christians in North Africa, Iberia, France and Austro-Hungary had been under sustained attack by Islamic forces for hundreds of years. The mounting of the Crusades was a very belated reaction to that violence.
The Battle of Tours/Poitiers is seen as the apogee of Muslim incursion into Western Europe, yet it occurred some 400 years BEFORE the first Crusade. Also, much is being made of the violence of the Crusaders, yet the only contemporary account available about the Muslim Armies as they entered France across the Pyrenees is: ‘They moved across the land like a dark cloud’. One doesn’t need much imagination to glean the reality.
Apart from the history, the present day situation is also relevant. In the UK, there is a well-supported and successful rugby club named the Saracens. A look at their website shows imagery and text that seeks to align the bravery of original Saracens with the club’s efforts on the field. I know of no suggestion that the name and imagery of Saracens Rugby Club is an ‘in yer face’ to Christians, nor was there any backlash against the club after Manchester Arena and multiple other atrocities by individuals claiming to represent Islam.
Finally, let’s look at it from the viewpoint of Muslim migrants and refugees, seeking to make their homes in the Christian West and elsewhere.
Isn’t it part of their acculturalisation and integration, that they encounter Christian symbolism and practice on a daily basis? This reality should be made clear to these people by refugee and immigration officials and I’m sure it is. Going further, I ask would the leaders of Hinduism (India), Shintoism (Japan) or Buddhism (Thailand), be expected to put aside some artefact of their religions to atone for a similar tragedy in their countries?
In summary, why then should there be a community-generated move against Crusader-brand rugby in New Zealand, when it passes no historical test and when compared with the Saracens situation in the UK, passes no test of current opinion either?
I urge you to correct this over-the-top ‘mea culpa’ behaviour by misguided groups of Canterbury people.
Yours sincerely’
Lotus says
Good letter, wussie reply.
There was a time when the Christian clergy used to stand up against lsam. They exhorted and inspired the rulers to unite and face the Islamic threat.
That’s all gone now. These days the clergy are either spineless waterweeds or are too busy engaging in ‘interfaith dialogue’ to ever criticise Islam.
Rob says
I felt like responding with a question: “When was the last time the hymn ‘Hold high the cross’ was sung in the Cathedral and do you have plans to substitute the word ‘Crescent’ for ‘Cross’?”
Lotus says
These days the clergy are even using the Quran as the basis for sermons and are reading it out in churches.
If these right-on clergy think Islam is so great, they should just convert and be done with it.
If not, they should stand up for the religion they supposedly profess.
Ole Pederson says
Oh this is interesting, as many Muslims I’ve seen – male and female – carry a little golden sword around their necks.
FireFox says
This bit of insanity was promoted by a bleeding heart leftist woman, ‘cuz …feelings matter more.
Just like the false-feminist and world-class hypocrite/village idiot, the Twinkletoes of drama and black-face, PM Turdeau, who never misses a chance to support laws against “words” and the “hurt feelings” of moslems.
Merkel, the “childless” German Chancellor spared the feelings of the thousands of invading moslem men who sexually assaulted and raped 600-1400 German women and girls in Cologne on New Years Eve, by telling the police and newspapers to keep quiet about it. She didn’t care about the terror her fellow German women felt while being attacked by these savages.
The idiocracy of the all-female Swedish government ignoring the unassimilating moslem masses is another example.
The list goes on.
Those who make choices based on feelings should never be voted into positions of power, and leftist women in particular.