Added: 3 years ago
From: RealCrusadeHistory
Views: 23,607
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (1,095)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Yes, war is cruel. No side is innocent. But it is still undeniable that Saladin's treatment of Jerusalem was better than that of the first Crusade. It is not humane in mordern moral, but it was still a significant improvement from the first Crusade.

  • @outsky2008 I disagree completely. Selling women and boys into sex slavery has no equal in terms of viciousness and evil. What Saladin did to countless women and children in Jerusalem, sentencing them to lives of rape and exploitation at the hands of uncaring masters, lasted for decades for the victims involved. Long after Saladin's conquest of Jerusalem these poor souls were still suffering from his work. Imagine how horrible that must have been for them.

  • @joey143anna watch history channel and hollywood movies white people are bad guys, muslims cantget in trouble

  • @AminThePoet o my lurd watch the history channels version, hes not christian biased he is proving people wrong WEAK sources? those people lived with saladin.

  • @Cocteau120 in 6th crusade jerusalem was taken by christians

  • @shore2222 ....You mean WAS CHRISTIAN.

  • @Sherzar how were they in spain...they drove the christians out and slaughtered them idiot you do resear h

  • I love it when people have heated yet pathetic arguments on Youtube videos. Just a guess but the omnipotent being in the sky is probably sick of your bitching. Killing is people is wrong, no matter what religion one is. Christianity and Islam to my knowledge pretty much the same, least in the fact that they have committed uncountable acts of violence and murder. So little children in need of more hugs from Mommy my advice to you would be to stop this petty bickering and make the world better.

  • really? this is more barbaric from what had happen 80 year before this event? you think? nahhh i dont think you can.

  • Now the Israelites are fucking the White Muslim Palestinian Babes... Isn't it Payback time for the Jews?

  • @FBHZekk The Slaying of Non - Muslims Never Against Koran. See Coptics in Egypt 2011, Chaldeans in Iraq 2010 and Christians of Pakistan 2009 (Gojra)...

    Saladin did nothing Wrong because he acted upon Koran, I think you should say That.

  • @AminThePoet

    Meanwhile Islam is the whipped dog of the world, with high infant mortality rates, high rates of birth defects, and economic ruin in every Muslim country. Islam is crumbling and dying faster than any religion in the world.

  • @Cocteau120 thank the gods for that! We need to hasten that death!

  • @AminThePoet

    History proves Saladin to be a terrorist to Muslims as well as Christians. He brutally conquered and murdered untold numbers of Muslims in Syria, Palestine, and Egypt. So shut up about that. Hahaha, you think Christianity is dying? Christianity is the LARGEST religion in the world and THE FASTEST GROWING. Muslims are converting to Christianity in droves, and who can blame them?

  • Unfortunately people seem to believe what their already made up minds want to believe. Why Hollywood and acadamia have this infatuation with Saladin is beyond me. He was a ruthless terrorist (scores of historians bear this out-as you begin to point out).

  • @vasa2007sss - How was Saladin a terrorist? He defended the lands he was born in and lived. Plus the above is a corruption of History.

    The maker of the video does not even know who Shahab al-Din Suhrawardi is for example.

  • @AminThePoet

    Actually, Saladin spent most of his career fighting other Muslims. He used violence to subjugate Egypt, and he made many raids on Persian lands further east, even attempting to capture Mosul from his fellow Muslims. Only as an old man, after he'd spent decades attacking other Muslims, did he turn his attention to Christian-held lands. Richard the Lionheart reversed most of his Christian conquests.

  • @RealCrusadeHistory - The question was "how is Saladin a terrorist" - which you failed to answer.

    Richard - did NOT reverse most of his Christian conquest - now you are simply making up things - ultimately he failed to capture Jerusalem - the reason he set out.

    Second - he died at about 55 years of age - he fought Christians for 13-17 years. He halted their progress and they were kicked out. He was right to fight like of Egypt and reunite Muslims.

  • @AminThePoet

    Saladin was a terrorist to his own people. Let's see, Jerusalem, Kerak, and Toron were basically all that Saladin took. Richard reclaimed Acre, Jaffa, Caesrea, Tiberias, and shortly thereafter the Crusaders reclaimed Ascalon and Beirut. So yes, virtually all of Saladin's conquests were ultimately reversed. Only Jerusalem and the holdings beyond the Jordan were lost permanently. He didn't unite the Muslims, he killed the Muslims who resisted him and enslaved their countrymen.

  • @Cocteau120 - ha ha ha - crusaders were wiped out. Plus over the years Salading had taken a lot more land from Crusaders.

    Second if Saladin was a terrorists - that makes like of Richard hell of a lot worse. And no he was not a terrorist u fail to prove it.

    Second it is just u saying it. Actual history does not agree with a bitter and twisted old Christian.

  • @AminThePoet

    I'm not old. I'm very young. I have a young wife and we are going to have a lot of children, all of whom will grow up to be warriors who will plunder and desecrate Muslim lands. Again, your history is just wrong. You don't even have a sense of the geography of the region. Saladin's conquests WERE ALMOST ENTIRELY REVERSED. Jerusalem and the castles beyond the Jordan WERE ALL he kept. And after his death, his empire fell apart as his idiot family started fighting each other.

  • @AminThePoet

    Also, the Crusades ultimately prevailed in many parts of the world. For example, the Muslim vermin were totally wiped out in Spain, as well as Italy, Sicily, Hungary, etc. Don't forget Lepanto you disgusting Islamic pig.

  • @Cocteau120 - There we have it pure HATE. No worries though - I do not condone such language or such hate.

    I do not think many Christians share your view or are such. Thank God!

  • @AminThePoet

    And of course you have no answer for my arguments because you're ignorant of history. Don't you dare talk to me about hate. Your religion is pure hate, and your people have brutalized the world for centuries in the name of that hate. I'm smart enough to recognize the vile evil that you represent, and that disturbs you. It won't work on me, scum bag. And trust me, Christians all over the world are waking up to what murderous psychopaths you Muslims are. You will lose.

  • @Cocteau120 - which argument did you make? None - else repeat your argument only. All you did was come out with hate from your disgusting mind.

    Christianity is the one THAT has brutalised the world. What else do you call WW1 WW2? Hardly - no on practices Christianity outside of Africa and some parts of USA.

    Anyone can tell by your language who is the hate manger. It is obvious.

  • @AminThePoet

    Yes, there is one thing and one thing only that I hate, and that is evil. Islam, it just so happens, is the embodiment of evil. I stand with my Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, and fellow Christian brothers in DEFIANCE of the evil that is Islam. You won't win. Your culture and religion will die with a poverty-stricken and birth defect-ridden whimper.

  • @Cocteau120 I really doubt that you ever touched a history book. Hate? Hate? You want to talk about hate? Muslims were driven out of Spain. True. But how were they driven out? They weren't driven out. They were slaughtered. They were burned in stakes. Unlike your so called "knights" of "chivalry" Saladin had let many prisoners of war go. He even helped them. He even helped Richard numerous times. There are many accounts about it. Do your research before abusing a hero.

  • @Sherzar

    I'm afraid your facts are incorrect. Saladin himself viewed the Third Crusade as a terrible defeat for Islam. This is what Saladin said: 'I fear to make peace, not knowing what may become of me. Our enemy will grow strong, now that they have retained these lands. They will come forth to recover the rest of their lands and you will see every one of them ensconced on his hill-top,' meaning in his castle, 'having announced, “I shall stay put” and the Muslims will be ruined.'

  • @RealCrusadeHistory

    That quote is from Baha ad-Din in his "Rare and Excellent History of Saladin", p 232. Baha ad-Din, of course, was a close friend to Saladin and wrote extensively on his life.

  • @RealCrusadeHistory Lol? did you comment yourself?

  • @RealCrusadeHistory I cannot help but find you to be slightly biased toward the Christian faith. Which since I do believe you are a Christian is understandable. I agree that Saladin was ruthless but one had to be to survive back then. I find him to be no worse than any other rule. However, to be romanticized -as you called it- as he was the man had to have done something right. And the point is he didn't kill everyone in Jeruselum which is good.

  • Bulls Crap and all r the lies.

  • BS

  • everytime i watch documentary movies, why is it asians and middle easterns are always the bad guys? they even claim the persian empire as murderous barbarians.

  • Saladin's cruelty was nothing compared to the christians, they mached from ALL of Europe to kill, rape, pillage, murder and burn all in their path. The templars were a version of WW2 SS officers, And does it matter if Saladin was cruel? did he invade europe as the Crusaders invaded Israel

  • and executed at least 600 or 700 templar knights and workers at Vadum Yacob crusader castle,it is a huge number

  • Comment removed

  • Dont lie plz,u all know Salah Aldin who has represented the REAL MUSLIM 

  • If you compare it to the Crusaders is merciful

  • does anyone realise the amount of anti-islamic videos this guy has made making those who was christian calling them "heroes" its just a point to be made

  • Fuck Islam and Muslim’s spoon-fed version of it. That truth is coming out and thanks to the internet more people are able to know about it. Islam is a religion os peace give me a fucking break. I'm not fan of Chrisianity either but if Jesus did half the things Muhammed did in his prophetic career, Christianity would still be doing what Islam is doing. Much needs to be learned about the Crusades because Muslims blame them on their current misfortunes.

  • WE JUST NEED TO FUCK ALL THE CRISTAINS IN WORLD CRISTAINS ARE THE MOST FOLLISH AND FUCKERS PEOPLE IN WORLD ..........FUCK U AND YOUR RELIGION ..IF U COME IN FRONT OF ME THEN I WILL TELL U THE POWER OF ISLAM ...DNT FORGET HOW SALADIN FUCK U CRISTAIN IN EVERY BATTLES GO LEARN THE HISTORY YOUR MONKS AND TEMPLERS BEG SALADIN AND SUCK HIS FOOT FOR BEGGING FOR LIFE IN BATTLE OF HATTIN...U CRISTAINS MOTHERS FUCKERS

  • @bbad388

    The power of Islam? You mean the power to hide in caves and use children as human shields? Get real, bitch. Islam was powerful in the Middle Ages but today you are the whipped dogs of a world ruled by whites. Bring it on any time, you filthy vermin. We'll murder you like dogs. We'll cut your fucking throats and piss on your filthy koran. Also, don't forget how in Crusader Spain we turned your faggot emirs into tribute paying bitches before we stomped your heads in and raped your women.

  • @Cocteau120 u fucking terrorist...

  • with respect what you said was incorrect.

    i have studied about saladin long time ago and still remembered the history and biography of saladin

    when richard the lionheart was sick and on the verge of death, saladin sent a profesional doctor to his aid

    now how can a merciless dictator you call Saladin helped his enemy ( a christian )

    when he could just let him die in his death bed

    but that does not mean he did not make sins in the past, but what you said was not right

  • @JUGED911 I believe Saladin actually send Richard a fruit basket as a kind gesture.

  • @sundancekid9000 yess its true , and also he visted richard when he was seriously ill.

  • @4511394

    You idiot. Saladin and Richard NEVER met in person. Your belief that Saladin visited Richard while he was ill is nothing more than a childish fantasy.

  • @Cocteau120 richard and saladin have met alot of times in battles and also when the french betrayed richard and shot him with an arrow saladin went and tried to heal him through his great knowledge in medecine but hestorical books of christians didnt write anything about that another thing richard didnt come to jerusalem for nothing he fought in jerusalem and he used the long wooden towers but at that time saladin had an chemical potion (acids) so the towers were on fire and there was n

  • @4511394

    You're an absolute ignoramus. Richard fought Saladin's army, but I repeat Saladin and Richard NEVER MET in person, you idiot. Saladin certainly never did a little nursemaid routine on Richard. Christians at that time had exactly the same medical knowledge as Muslims. It went back to the Greeks, and it was humor theory. It was wrong. You are obviously only marginally literate in addition to being totally ignorant of history.

  • @Cocteau120

    Actually Salah Ad-Din met Richard , he was even surprised that Salah Ad-din could speak a french almost perfect because Richard main language was french , and the Arab world was the most advanced in everything exept the war , The Vatican considered the scientist as satanics and burned them while the muslim allowed them they even had a better quality of life , and btw greeks stole learnt alot form the persians .

  • @NasriTheNewKing

    You're an ignoramus. Virtually everything you just listed is incorrect. Saladin could not speak French. The Catholic Church fostered the growth of science. You're absolutely wrong about everything you believe. How does it feel to be a complete idiot?

  • @Cocteau120

    You should open a book and after you can say who's idiot or not , Salah ad-din ( and not saladin , who's idiot once again ?) spoke french to Richard who himself didn't even speak a single word of english , his main language was french like the whole england since the conquest of 1066 , The Catholic chruch never allowed them the time as allowed them , if it was for the vatican , newton , einstein and so on would have been burned just like in the old times .

  • @Cocteau120

    You want another prove that Salah Ad-Din spoke french ? He also spoke many times with Balwin IV ( his real name Baudouin IV ) who was french , he's born in jerusalem but his family is from Anjou , french was the main language of jerusalem even after its fall , since 1099 . The arabs called the crusaders "Franks" because Crusaders didn't exist , it has been used for the first time during the 18th century . And you know why ? Because most of the crusaders spoke french .

  • @NasriTheNewKing

    Good lord you're a buffoon. I know all of that. But none of that changes the fact that Saladin DID NOT speak French. Period. Every historian in the world agrees with me you ignoramus. Show me the proof. Where is the evidence that Saladin spoke French?

  • @Cocteau120

    1183 Baudouin IV signed a pact with Salah Ad-Din , they met there , because the 2 seals must be on it , tey signed that pact when he put his nephew on the throne of Jerusalem because he was to young but died later 3 years later . Guy de Lusignan became the new king and the war restarted , when Baudouin IV died Salah Ad-Din honored him pretty strange if he never met him . Every hisotrian ? Can you name some of them ?

  • @Cocteau120

    In 1192 France was going to invade England which obligated Richard to sign a peeace with saladin and come in england , he met him and asked him to open the way to the pelgrims and to block the french pelgrims , Salah Ad-Din answered "Our religion forbids us to prevent access to holy sites to all the pilgrims coming from far away" . But yeah they have never met (y) . I thought you knew everything . Oh yeah so do your " historians "

  • @NasriTheNewKing

    You are aware that there is a difference between history and legend, correct? Richard and Saladin NEVER MET in person. They exchanged messengers, but never actually met face to face. Over the years Muslims and Christians told many stories about Richard and Saladin meeting and conversing, all of them mythological. The fact is that the two men never met in person, and Saladin did not speak French. There is evidence that Saladin's brother spoke French.

  • @Cocteau120

    I know that Ad-Adel spoke french , Richard wanted to marry his sister to that man , the fact that his brother spoke french proves also that Salah Ad-Din also speake french , it was the wish of their uncle " know your enemy " , Salah Ad-Din studied the history of europe especially Charles Martel who he would have liked to fight , did you know that Salah Ad-Din planed to invade Europe ? Philipe August warned him and told him that he'll wait him with an army of atleast 80 000 men .

  • @Cocteau120

    Read the biograhy wrote by his close friend Baha Ad-Din Ibn Shaddad you'll learn alot about Salah Ad-Din .

  • @NasriTheNewKing

    I've read that book. Nowhere in that book does it say that Saladin met Richard in person. That's because it didn't happen. How does it feel to be completely ignorant?

  • @Cocteau120

    Ignorant ? I'm pretty sure i know way way way way way more things than you , in fact you don't even know that they've met to sign the peace ...

  • @Cocteau120

    Dude i gave you facts , the date , the circumstance ,the ask of Richard , the answer of Salah Ad-Din and you dare to call me ignorant after that wtf seriously ? You want me to make you look like a ignorant ? I know the whole fucking history of europe , antiquity to the fucking modern days , making you ignorant would be very easy for me .

  • @NasriTheNewKing

    Hahaha, I've got some bad news for you champ, you are very ignorant of history. You actually believe silly things like Richard and Saladin met in person, and that Saladin spoke French. And then you refer me to Baha ad-Din, who never once wrote that the two met!

  • @Cocteau120

    Did i say that Baha Ad-Din wrote it ? NO . For the simple reason he wasn't there , you thought he was his little dog which followed him everywhere ? Baha Ad-Din wrote the biography on the moment that he passed with him and on some battle where he joined him .

  • @NasriTheNewKing

    I'm growing weary of your blatant ignorance and stupidity. You're an idiot if you think Richard and Saladin met. Period. They never did. They NEVER MET ONCE. NEVER. They send diplomats back and forth, but THEY NEVER MET IN PERSON. How stupid are you? Do you have google? Google this topic you retarded monkey. It will take two seconds if you can manage to type their names coherently. There is absolutely no question that Richard and Saladin DID NOT MEET EACH OTHER IN PERSON.

  • @Cocteau120

    Did you know that during middle-age and even later a man to hairy was considered as a werewolf by the church and burned ? I let you imagine with the scienstist , they thought the science was magic , just check the crusade launched against the heretic cathares in south of france during the 13th century . And the only reason why the church allowed all those scientist is because of the reforme in 1517 .

  • @NasriTheNewKing

    You also seem to be laboring under the delusion that Islam fostered the development of modern science, when in fact Islamic ideas of Allah prevented a scientific revolution in the Islamic world. Read Alfred Whitehead's discussion of this. Catholicism, on the other hand, fostered and initiated the scientific revolution. Jean Buridan and other monks from the 14th Century did the first modern experiments. That's why Europe blossomed into a scientific center while Islam stagnated.

  • @Cocteau120

    14th century we are far from the 3rd crusade , what don't you look before the 14th century , how many invention has been realized before the 14th Century ? All the invention were mainly about war , arabs were the most refined in the world till the church allow the scientists . It has been proved many times . Just the fact that the arabs lived atleast 20 years more than europeans show that they were more advanced about midicine .

  • @NasriTheNewKing

    Nope, wrong again. The Muslims had NO science. They did cataloging like the ancient Greeks, and they used ancient Greek medicine based on the humor theory. Indeed, EVERYTHING the Arabs had they got from Byzantine CHRISTIANS and Persian pagans. The scientific revolution BEGINS with medieval WESTERN Christians in the 13th-14th Centuries. The Western view of God allowed for the development of science. The first scientists were all Western Christian monks. The Church started it!

  • @Cocteau120

    The one that don't know what he's talking about is for sure you , Charlemagne started it 600 years ealier because the eastern world ( byzantine empire , and arabs , especially chinese too ) were more advanced just check it by yourself , and btw Charlemagne wasn't the curch he was superior to them , in the fucking whole christiany history he's the only one that has been superior to the pope , and ater his death the pope took back the control and restarted his shit .

  • @JUGED911 No, you are incorrect. Everything RCH said is 100% accurate. Learn your history.

  • really?

  • God bless the crusaders.

  • @FBHZekk

    Saladin himself wept over the victories of the Westerners, complaining that once he was gone the Muslims would be destroyed. So with a much smaller army and on Saladin's home turf Richard entirely stopped Saladin in his tracks and deprived him of key cities like Acre, Jaffa, Caesarea, etc. In addition, Richard seized Cypress for the Crusaders from a Byzantine ally of Saladin.

  • @FBHZekk

    RCH is infinitely more intelligent than you, that's plain from his brilliantly researched videos. I'm glad that you can trace your roots back to the defeated and humiliated Muslims of Spain. Your dead wrong about Richard. Let's see, he brutally defeated Saladin at every military encounter of the Third Crusade and deprived the Muslims of territory. Saladin was humiliated, and he was the one forced to accept a treaty.

  • @FBHZekk

    Learn to use proper grammar before you start spouting off like an idiot. The Crusade in Al Andalus was magnificent, and ended in the destruction of the Islamic vermin. Muslims have never been tolerant and that includes the Muslim filth of Spain. Saladin wasn't even tolerant of his own people. He murdered thousands of Muslims to gain his power.

  • @FBHZekk ha the Muslims were responsible for the Killing, Torturing and Raping of Christians before the Crusades. do your research.

  • @FBHZekk No I wasn't aware that a more important crusade was being fought in Al Andalus. either way it's Irrelevant. it doesn't matter what "Saladin's Sisters and Brothers to the West" would have tolerated. Saladin himself said he wanted to conquer western civilization.

  • these arguments of who is right between the Christians and the Muslims is precisely the reason and cause of bloodshed between our religions..tsk

  • Comment removed

  • @Oldskool97 you're a fool. this video isn't about Christian Supremacy. it's challenging the lies about Saladin. Saladin was a cruel butcherer who wanted to take over the whole of western civilization and eradicate Christianity while he was at it. good for you. you buy into the politically correct lies about the crusades as taught by the public indoctrination system. and the Muslims and Crusaders both committed atrocities, but the Muslims started it with their persecution of Christians.

  • you can not be enemy of law. anywhere..

  • You all are making very arrogant comments. You must understand, you're criticising the values and ideals of the medieval mans mind.

  • History... something we cannot prove considering a mans word holds no value anymore, nor were video cameras present for factual tracing.

    They make crusaders out to be the same as pillaging vikings just because criminals were excepted for redemption

    We say the saracens had cannibals.

    Really, anyone will write anything to belittle their enemies.

    One thing we need to understand is that the winner of any major war, writes how the end "is" Whether true or not.

    Keep this in mind everyone.

  • @brutal6agani

    Movies in the west are a bunch of nonsense. It seems you are alone in understanding the causes of the destruction of USA. In fact I don't even find the fact of destruction obvious. I don't see how crusades could ever be Masonic as masons were founded centuries later. Crusades were an action of defense and charity towards the Christians of the East by their Western brethren.

  • @NovaGub I am talking about the demonic elites not the normal masons we study about in school.

  • Fake and Gay

  • @KQDaVRQ you need to brush up on your history..Saladin never captured Richard, in fact they never met! Did you forget about Acre? Jaffa? Ascalon? These are some important events that you are conveniently forgetting...

  • why don't you make the video of the Albigeois Crusade If you call the muslims barbaric and cannibals you should know the christian's history before blaming muslims look to history and see the christians butchered themselves at medieval age

  • ONCE richard felt sick and saladin decided to go and find if he is right or able to fight with me so he hide his face and went to his camp .some how richard came to know that that guy standing infront of him is saladin.richard lying on the bed picked a iron rod nd bend it said " richard stil have power in his hands ".richards wife siting next to him , saladin piked her vale up wid his sword and just droped it the vale cut into pieces and said " that is the sharpnes of saladins sword"nd went away

  • This video is baseless.

  • God bless you. Great job.

  • In Sahih Muslim, Book 8 Chapter 22 in the section on Al 'Azl or Incomplete Sexual Intercourse, Muhammad told his Companions to go ahead and have illicit sex with their captive married women without practicing coitus interruptus (al-'azl).

  • See also Koran Suras 4:3; 23:5-6; 33:50; 70:22-30, all of which permit male slave-owners to have sex with their slave-girls. Suras 23:5-6 and 70:22-230 allow men to have sex with them in the Meccan period, during times of peace before Muhammad initiated his skirmishes and wars while being based in Medina.

  • @IsraelGudsAugestein its not sex, its talkin about marriage u cunt hole, read the whole verse and it says giv them their dowers, this means marrying a slave girls is an act of freeing a slave.

  • @RealCrusadeHistory heard of tipu sultan? he tiger who thought british alone?

  • @RealCrusadeHistory wat is this video???? anyone with a knowledge will know even non-muslim historian that saladin was the greatest figure in the crusade period, he did not kill an non combatant innocent non-mulims whilst crusaders killed their christians, men women and children when they marched into jurasalem.

  • Saladin should have killed all the crusaders

  • @kurdishleader

    Haha, he certainly tried, but he got his ass kicked by Richard the Lionheart, who put an end to his dreams of driving the Crusaders from palestine. It's amazing how severely Richard defeated Saladin on Saladin's home soil. If Saladin had ever attacked Richard in France or England Richard would have slaughtered the whole of Saladin's army and probably killed Saladin himself. DEATH TO ISLAM!!!

  • @RealCrusadeHistory Ottoman empire controled Jurusalem 300 years!!!!!!

    Muslims are the best die christian.

  • @RealCrusadeHistory so do you mean the richard is undefeated dont make me laugh richard defeated saladin at arsuf but he had nothing and couldnt take back Jerusalem and he is held captive by saladin also then the barbaric saladin let him go to his land but there was a little problem his brother named john lackland

  • @RealCrusadeHistory But Richard was as much of an arrogant ass as you make Salah-al-Din out to be. You say death to Islam. Why? What has Islam done that was so evil. Christianity had, and has, committed terrible crimes. I am a Christian, and I am ashamed of what so-called Christians have done in the name of God. Certainly some Muslims have done wicked things, but is that the truth about Islam as a whole??? That seems unlikely, if not impossible.

  • @ARP7777777

    Richard was a hero. Period. You disgust me. Islam has enslaved and butchered untold numbers of Christians, Jews, Hindus, and pagans. Look at the Siege of Ani in the 1060's, when the Turks killed so many Armenians that the streets were clogged with corpses. Or 1453 when the Turks took Constantinople and brutally slaughtered and raped untold numbers of Christians. You are not a Christian, you are a traitor and a coward. The Crusades were a just defense against an evil foe.

  • @RealCrusadeHistory Why is Richard a hero? For killing the garrison of Acre because he was impatient? For fighting his own father? For spending only SIX MONTHS in England TOTAL during his reign? For taxing his people for the Crusades, and then again to get the money to ransom him when he was captured coming back? What did Richard do that was heroic in the Middle East? As for this (Saladin is EVIL) stuff you peddle, I think you are exaggerating.

  • @RealCrusadeHistory You seem to want to justify what the Crusaders did. What about the massacre of the entire population of the city of Jerusalam, just for a start, and the sack of Constantinople? The massacres of Jewish communities both in Europe and in Outremer. The killing of Maronite Christian groups, and countless others. Christians were allowed to live under Muslim rule, they just had to pay higher taxes. What is your next brilliant defense? I would like to know.

  • @RealCrusadeHistory Please keep hateful religious comments out. 

  • @RealCrusadeHistory dont brag too much about richard why didnt he restore jerusalem then cuz he didnt have the balls to keep it a few victories is nothing compared to the real goal of the crusades afterwards we kicked your christian ass fair and square in the remaining crusades from the fourth to the last one and the crusades as a whole was a fiasco winning a battle doesnt mean you win the war

  • @houssem711

    We'll grant you that, vermin. For a while we lost the Holy Land. But, you got your asses kicked in Spain big time. Generations of Muslims wrote tearful laments at the loss of precious Al-Andalus to the Christian knights. You also got your asses kicked in the Italian campaigns. Remember, Robert Guiscard spanked the Muslims hard when he took Sicily from them. Fast forward a few centuries and you Muslims are entirely defeated. Israel and the US own you like slaves. In the end we won.

  • @kurdishleader Wow, if that had happened, would you folks even have electricity? Would you have cars? Computers???? Once the loot ran out, the poverty set in for Muslims. Worst thing would be for those conquered by Islam to find out the history of their people before Islam, the libraries and knowledge which even in today's world is being destroyed. People who spend so much time banging their head on the floor, don't have much time left to work. Work builds wealth. That was the point of slavery!

  • @kurdishleader he did

  • @bm1657316573

    No he didn't, he let most of them go. Then he was defeated by Richard the Lionheart.

  • I would also recommend a book by Thomas Asbridge titled "The Crusades". There you can find additional information about Saladin's atrocitiesduring his career. Examples like murdering 50000 (!) black soldiers who turned out to be too rebelious, gruesome executions of captured members of Reynauld de Chatillon's flotilla, forcing non-muslims to wear distinctive clothing etc. BTW. the author worships all the proscribed multi-culti gods, so the source can't be attacked from that angle.

  • @onemoreturn

    an excellent book, my friend! Thanks for sharing your knowledge and insight!

  • @onemoreturn - Dr Asbridge is highly biased - majority of his sources were weak. Also he has well established "anti-Islam" bias.

  • @AminThePoet

    In your opinion, that is?

  • boring!!

  • Anyone who lived from those days in our own would be considered a monster. He had a guy executed for being breaking the law, not exactly out of the ordinary for rulers of the day. He put to death or had sold into slavery innocent people. His contemporaries were just as ruthless. It's interesting you quote Baha al-Din ibn Shaddad, yet ignore the many pages of his work singing praise for the Sultan, and even a few pages where he felt the Sultan was being too generous. *eyeroll* Academics...

  • u all (christians) who make bad video about the muslims because u r resentful to muslim .. saladin is a great muslim warrior and kind-hearted man

  • watch this video : Tigers of Islam:Sultan Salahuddin Ayyubi - Part 1/5 ( Saladin ) صلاح الدين بن أيوب‎

    the true story of salahuddin, a kind-hearted man, muslim warrior who take jerussalem.

  • @black5620 '' A kind hearted man who take jerusalem '' So what your saying is he's kind hearted but he will take land that is meant to be the holy place for christians and jew's also ? very generous.

  • read history

  • Saladin was not a Humanist, Nor Kurd Nor even a Man. But a slave of Islam and Arab. He laid the foundation stone for Terrorism. He is a Jihadi.

  • ssaladin was a ruthless murderer... hated everything and everyone... typical muslim

  • It is equally true that his generosity, his piety, devoid of fanaticism, that flower of liberality and courtesy which had been the model of our old chroniclers, won him no less popularity in Frankish Syria than in the lands of Islam.

    René Grousset (writer) WIKIPEDIA!!

    Check this!!

  • Saladin was a slave of the arabs after his mom was raped by black arab men from Sudan and MEcca. So Saladin is Arab and not Kurdish. He slaughtered many Kurds and Iranians and armenians and westerners including Egyptians. Down with Saladin.

  • shut up man Go and do some research on him.He is regarded even by Western Historians and the references of Baha al din are given in Wikipedia.Even Baha al din admits his tolerance!!

  • Looking at your videos and comments, you are clearly anti-Islamic, hate provoker, and a one sided person. Therefore, all your information you pose though your videos must not be taken into account, or believed by the neutral public masses. Telling a story in which you are invoking hatred toward a side is like a sided historian recording false history of his enemies.

  • stupid ignorant

  • Anyone who thinks differently to the video, please put actual facts to argue your point not your opinions because it counts for nothing. Great video

  • @TheCrump3t What are you talking about? typing WIKIPEDIA (terrible source) in caps makes my points validated. right?

  • @babertron I don't really understand what your trying to say but what i will say is -Go and research this topic on other sites and from other sources, i think you find that however much you dislike it that the cristians have been scapegoats for the crusades for far to long and people are waking up and researching it rather than being fed shite information. Look at other source's and maybe you will open your eyes.

  • @TheCrump3t ...how did you not get what I was saying? lol i was supporting your claim dude. basically saying that all the people calling this video BS need to site contrary info. that typing "WIKIPEDIA" doesn't make your point valid as It's a terrible source.

  • If Saladin was sooo bad like you claim christians whouldn't have lived this long in Jerusalem.

    Saladin was respected, because he was no punk and you guys can't take it!

    Lets not forget the your fine crusaders slaughtered woman n children if I wasnt crazy I would think your Jew starting shit up!

  • @Nikateer Would you care to refute what the maker of this video says? If Saladin was sooo good it should be easy.

    Thanks.

  • Saladin is a man of mercy and courage....even christians respect this great man

  • @qais1990able ,, ?? ARE YOU CHRISTIAN?

  • u r a liar u son of a bitch

    he was a kind to everybody

    u r just showing that muslims r bad

  • @rockstarzoni calling someone names (without proof) isn't the best way to convince people you know the difference between a tolerant and intolerant person...

  • All false, Saladin was very merciful and tolerant. Really sad to change history this way.

  • crusades were promoved for "god" but in the battlefield it was no different of another war the cardenals and pope didnt gave a shit for their god just TERRITORY unlike the racist dipshits in the most rated comments who are dumnb enough to believe the crusades were for god

  • crowdedcompany, thats straight from Wiki, please use your own words ! LOL

  • Who was magnanimous and tolerant? Richard!!!

  • Who was magnanimous and tolerant? Richard!

  • And the reality of this video is that you deny and corrupt history with just your stupid video !

    Saladin's chivalrous behavior was noted by Christian chroniclers, especially in the accounts of the siege of Kerak in Moab, and despite being the nemesis of the Crusaders he won the respect of many of them, including Richard the Lionheart; rather than becoming a hated figure in Europe, he became a celebrated example of the principles of chivalry.

  • This Saladin was just another muslim, nothing new! No change.

  • compare with most of crusaders army, saladin is more better than them. During the conqurered of jeruselem, most of these crusaders were beheaded and slaughting a thousand of muslim and arab (muslim and christians). These is most worst history in the world! what a fucking crap!

  • this is the most ridiculous video ever... a lot of the examples shown here are false and anyone whos ever studied saladin will know that when saldin conquered any country, he did not massacre or torture prisoners and allowed them to keep their religions. PLUS when the wives and families of these people begged him for the prisoners, he gave them back and those prisoners that were ransomes, he sometimes payed the ransom for these christian families... saladin is a truly great man who was very kind

  • @acefiresoul Sorry to ruin your day, this is the truth written down by other muslims. Your whole " history " is one of rape, killing and conquest. In Persia and India alone more than 200 million were killed. Biggest genocide every in history. But it doesn't fit into your perception so it is denied. 

  • @acefiresoul "saladin is a truly great man who was very kind"

    Actually he was a bit of a shit. After the battle of Hattin he had the Templars, Hospitallers and other members of the military orders put to death. To do this he gave swords to various muslim clerics and scholars and told them to get on with it. Few of the holy men knew much about the practicalities of killing and a lot were getting on a bit, so they hacked and sliced the christians into long and painful deaths.

  • suggest never going to a Arab country

  • Lets not forget what the crusaders have done.

  • @SeeN0More Explain that please,

  • Christians went on Crusades for wealth and land. There's nothing holy about war, and there's no good side in any war either

  • @BlackPanteraSociety

    you are right there was no good side in WWII. The Nazi's were not any worse then the Americans/British.

    Yes, I am being sarcastic because your statement is simplistic thinking.

  • @OxAO

    In battle, the Americans/British/French/Canad­ian/Whatever where as bad as the Wehrmacht, yes.

    Outside of battle, the Nazis committed acts that still haunt the German population today.

    But the Jewish extermination wasn't war, it was genocide.

  • @BlackPanteraSociety

    That statement can only be true if there is no good and evil. Making war on evil is good.

  • @OxAO

    Killing for good is like fucking for virginity