How Could Christians Do This?
Why followers of the Prince of Peace waged war.

October 1, 1993

Within Christian circles, the terms crusade and crusader survive as expressions of devout purpose. Near where I live, a Christian high school calls its athletic teams “Crusaders,” and several evangelical organizations refer to their ministries as Christian “crusades.”

In other circles, however, crusade usually triggers less admiration, more shock. It recalls the violence and cruelty of medieval military expeditions to conquer the Holy Land, all done in the name of Christ and with the blessing of the church.

Many of us, then, not only balk at using the term crusades, we ask, “How could Christians have done such a thing?”

Sweeping Forces

Historians usually answer this question by describing the historical circumstances, or the “proximate causes,” of the Crusades. Three such causes often top the list.

First, Christians faced the military and political threat of Islam. The Seljuk Turks, new and fanatical converts to Islam, invaded the Holy Land and seized Christianity’s sacred shrines. They then aggressively headed for Asia Minor, Christian territory. Forces of the Byzantine [Eastern Christian] Empire tried desperately to bar the invader, but at the battle of Manzikert (1071), the Turks captured the eastern emperor and scattered his army.

Within a few years, Asia Minor, the chief source of Byzantine revenue and troops, was lost. Nicea fell to the invaders in 1092, bringing the Turks perilously close to Constantinople, the Byzantine capital. The new emperor, Alexius I, sent emissaries to Pope Urban II, pleading for mercenaries to aid in the rescue of lost territories.

Thus, Christian crusaders streamed toward the Holy Land in part because they were invited. They were giving aid to Christians in the East.

Second, the Roman Catholic Church of the eleventh century was led by a militantly aggressive papacy. The reform-minded party of the church, which had recently come to power, thought church improvement lay in investing the pope with more authority; they cast a vision of the universal sovereignty of the Holy Father. In his rallying sermon for the First Crusade, Urban referred to himself as “spiritual ruler of the whole world.”

A universal Christian sovereign, naturally, would want the Holy Land liberated from Turkish “infidels,” so Urban was inclined to accept the invitation to send troops to Asia Minor and Palestine. Some historians speak of the First Crusade as “the foreign policy of the reformed papacy.” That foreign policy would, it was hoped, bring the Holy City of Jerusalem back under Christian control. And it would possibly restore unity between Eastern and Western Christians.

Third, Europeans, after centuries of political and economic disintegration, were entering a new era of self-conscious unity.

Separate regions worked to enhance mutual interests: forest land was cleared, new markets opened, and Italian shipping poised to challenge Muslim dominance in the eastern Mediterranean. Many historians have suggested the Crusades would have been next to impossible without these Italian ships.

One answer, then, to “How could they?” is simply, “Conditions were right.” Christian crusaders were swept along by the tides of history.

Deeper Questions

Still, most Christians today feel an ethical shock over the crusaders’ seemingly blind and bigoted religious zeal. It is easy for us to criticize the Crusades. They permanently embittered relations between Christians and Muslims, and they left Jews suspicious and fearful of Christians.

Yet, if we fail to see the crusaders’ spiritual ideals, we misperceive the spirit of the times. The evil elements of the Crusades, though repulsive, are not the whole story.

The Crusades raise deep questions about the human heart. What is the nature of a “good” society? How do we restrain evil? Can “good” be defined by Christian doctrine? If so, how shall destructive ideas (called “heresy”) be eliminated from society? Such questions are not buried in the twelfth century. Thoughtful Christians today, concerned about the moral decline in our own society, are asking essentially the same questions.

So, a second way to answer the question about Christian sponsorship of the Crusades is to check the ideals of the times. We might call these “more distant causes” or “internal motivations.”

One can scarcely speak of a single motive in a movement embracing hundreds of thousands of people over several centuries. Still, a look at three principal ideals of crusaders helps explain their motivations.

Defending Christians

Pope Urban II and other preachers of the Crusades wanted to defend Christian society. In launching the First Crusade, Urban reportedly exhorted his listeners, “You must carry succor to your brethren dwelling in the East. … The Turks have attacked them, … occupying more and more the lands of those Christians.” They have “destroyed the churches and devastated the kingdom of God.” If Christians permitted them to go unchallenged, “they will extend their sway more widely over many faithful servants of the Lord.”

Furthermore, Christians of the time believed that violence, if used rightly, was a proper means of defending Christians. Augustine had laid down the principles of a “just war”: it was conducted by the state; its purpose was the vindication of justice, meaning the defense of life and property, and it respected noncombatants, hostages, and prisoners. For Augustine, a just war’s purpose was to achieve peace. Even in waging war, a follower of Christ must “cherish the spirit of a peacemaker.”

Unfortunately, this ideal evaporated in the heat on the way to the Holy Land. The just defense of Christians faded from view, and Christians became increasingly inflamed with avenging the wrongs perpetrated against Christians and their holy places—especially Jerusalem.

En route to the Holy Land, crusading mobs destroyed Jewish communities in the Rhineland, raping, plundering, and murdering. And in the Holy Land, even Muslim noncombatants, women, and children, were slaughtered. In the fervor of a crusade, the noble end justified the ignoble means.

Knights’ Honor

Many crusaders were also motivated by the honor of knighthood. The clearest portrait of the ideal knight came from English philosopher John of Salisbury, who wrote, “What is the office of the duly ordained soldiery? To defend the church, to assail infidelity, to venerate the priesthood, to protect the poor from injuries, … to pour out their blood for their brothers … and, if need be, to lay down their lives. The high praises of God are in their throats, and two-edged swords are in their hands.”

The First Crusade, as originally designed, was composed of nobles from France, Germany, and Italy. The pope envisioned the Crusades partly as an outlet for restless, pugnacious nobles. “Gentle knights were born to fight,” wrote one French chronicler, “and war ennobles all who engage in it without fear or cowardice.” Urban wanted to enlist the knight for the glory of God.

Unfortunately, honor, in historian J. Huizinga’s words, is “a strange mixture of conscience and egotism.” In addition, though the crusaders formally took high moral and spiritual vows in “taking up the cross,” history shows that greed motivated some of them, at least some of the time. This mixture of knightly motives led too often to brutality.

Forgiveness of Sins

Finally, the crusaders were empowered by the hope of salvation, an ideal that was not buried with the crusaders.

For centuries, peaceful European pilgrims had been traveling to worship at the birthplace of Christ. The rise and spread of Islam during the seventh century did not interrupt this traffic. By the tenth century, bishops were organizing mass pilgrimages to the Holy Land. In 1065, about 7000 pilgrims set out from Germany, probably the largest of these events.

Like our rallies at state capitals or marches on Washington, these pilgrimages were part devotion and part celebration. Through the years, the church adopted them as acts of penance. Surrounded by deep, religious emotions, pilgrimages assumed an aura of special sanctity; any disruption of them could be interpreted as blasphemy.

The crisis came when the Seljuk Turks seized Jerusalem from their fellow Muslims and sometimes denied Christians access to Christianity’s most holy places. This halted medieval Christians from practicing a deeply meaningful act of devotion and an aid to salvation.

When Pope Urban II rallied Christians, he offered an extraordinary reward to those who set out to liberate the land of the Savior’s birth: “All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins.”

For years the church had claimed the power to remit part of a sinner’s temporal punishment, but no complete remission had been granted until this historic moment.

It was only a slight step further to confer like benefits upon those who were unable to go on a crusade but who contributed to the cause. Thus, as the risks of the pilgrimage were heightened, so were the spiritual rewards.

Another World

The intensity of crusaders was caught by Shakespeare, in words put in the mouth of that pugnacious English monarch Henry IV:

We are impressed and engaged to fight …
To chase those pagans in those holy fields,
Over whose acres walked those blessed feet,
Which fourteen hundred years ago were nailed,
For our advantage on the bitter cross.

Some Christian ideals change with time and culture. Today, we do not share many of the assumptions of medieval Christians. The modern world exalts democratic individualism, religious liberty, and the separation of church and state. Urban II and the crusaders lived in a world with different ideals.

Still, we consider it unfortunate that the crusaders never understood two basic truths: Christianity’s highest satisfactions are not guaranteed by possession of special places, and the sword is never God’s way to extend Christ’s kingdom.

Colin:  Welcome to the… (frantically COLIN looks around, and conveniently finds the time. Also DANIEL is preparing by putting on make-up) [time] News. Sponsored by News @ 7, they think they’re better than us, but have to be mentioned on our show to get viewers. Who’s laughing now?  Bwahahaha…

Bryan:  That would be you, sir.

Colin:  (ignores) Now over to our live correspondent Diane Summers, which is on the scene of the currently unfolding war between the French and the Huguenots.

Bryan: Hey, are you guys talking about St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre where the Catholics attacked all the Huguenots in Paris?

Colin:  Way to go intern. Way…. To…. Go…. What did I tell you about interrupting me?

Bryan: That if I ever did it again I’d get no Kibbles & Bits for one month. Sorry sir. (Goes off stage)

Daniel:  Diane… Diane? (DANIEL gets on the speaker) Diane… Diane? Walk into the camera… man, this person must not be very intelligent.

Colin:  Diane! What the heck are you doing!?

Daniel:  Wait, wait…! I’m getting something. What, someone wants me to walk into the came-… (Awkward silence) Oooooooooh. Well Jeff, I’ll be right back.

Colin:  My name’s not Jeff!

Daniel:  I know, I was talking to that guy over there. (COLIN looks. DANIEL runs and trips, then continues. COLIN goes on to describe the picture)

Daniel:  Hello, hello? Can you see me? Am I on camera?

Colin:  Yes, we can see you Diane. Can you please describe the scene that’s unraveling behind you?

(BRYAN, AIDAN, BLAKE enter away from DANIEL arguing among themselves)

Daniel:  Well there is… (he adlibs and describes pointless things in the scene)

Colin:  Not what I meant Diane…

Daniel:  Wait, they’re coming over here.

Aidan:  (speaking louder to BLAKE and BRYAN) No, you’re wrong!

Blake:  About what?

Bryan:  Remember… we were fighting ove-

Aidan:  (sounding epic) Quiet peasant! Let me explain… wait, you there with the microphone, you know they’re wrong, right?

Daniel:  Well I.D.K. (BRYAN stabs DANIEL)

Daniel:  ZOMG THE BLOOD IS GONNA STAIN MY SHIRT! (Runs and exits, prepares to become a French Soldier)

Colin:  Diane, Diane!! Hmm, well let’s watch and see how this plays out.

Blake + Aidan:  What did you do?!?!?!?! He was about to prove him wrong! (Pointing at each other; soon DANIEL comes on)

BRYAN:  Sorry, it slipped.

Aidan:  That’s what she said!

Blake:  No comment…

(BLAKE and AIDAN look at each other and stab BRYAN)

Aidan:  (At BLAKE) I challenge you to a duel!

Blake:  Why can’t our group of French Protestants live in peace?

Aidan:  Cause, you aren’t Catholic!

Aidan:  Now prepare to fight, (whips out lightsaber) I have 99 Attack!

Blake:  Well (puzzled) I have 96! (BLAKE gets a lucky shot)

Blake: You forgot about Strength!

(AIDAN disarms BLAKE)

Blake:  Fine, I’m going Super Saiyan!! This is for my 25,000 brothers and sisters you’ve killed!

Daniel:  Your reinforcements have arrived.

Daniel:  (Stabs Blake, has a hissy fit, starts to panic because he is French, tries to pick up Blake, and fails, then runs off)

Bryan:  1 month later.

Colin:  ….and all the kittens survived.

Daniel:  (recovered in bandages) Mumble mumble…

Colin:  Yes Diane, the Edict of Nantes, which grants Protestants and Catholics equality, is in effect…. Now let’s give some facts about an earlier story that made headline news.

Daniel:  Mumble mumble…

Colin:  Yes Diane, the Huguenot Massacre, now welcome out new female intern to give us the facts. Take it away Bryanna.

Bryan:  The attempted murder of the large fat one, Admiral Gaspard de Coligny, was unsuccessful. Speaking of which, why did the French cross the border?

Colin:  STOP BRYANNA! Attempted murder and unsuccessful murder mean the same thing. Now go get my coffee and your whipping. Now McBlakery, take it away.

Blake:  (Cooley) Why thank you Jeff.

Colin:  My name isn’t Jeff… (Quietly) Bwuahahhahha! They will never know my name is Jefff with 3 f’s!

Blake:  What did you say?

Colin:  I said nothing; do you want a whippin’ too?

Blake:  No sir, anyway, the Wars of Religion had ended and Henry IV (4th) had transitioned from Protestantism to Catholicism and settled it with the Edict of Nantes.

Daniel:  Mumble Mumble…

Blake: Well yea… a lot of people did die… 25,000 Protestants were murdered by the Catholics.

Daniel:  Mumble Mumble Mumble?

Blake:  No, the blood didn’t stain… and yes, Civil Wars led up to the Massacre.

Colin:  Come on guys! It’s time to get to see Bryanna whipped. (AIDAN and BRYAN come out, AIDAN starts whipping BRYAN)

THE END!

When analysing the gains and losses in conflict, one often needs to establish a standard point. Is there such thing as “the greater good”? Are some people more valuable or more disposable than others? We often see a heirarchy of importance when it comes to wars or battles in history. In medieval times, kings would rule wide areas of land and if a few hundred peasants were to die from a disease (like the plague) or were captured by a neighbouring tribe, there would not be too much fuss. However, the death of a prince, or, heaven forbid, a king, would cause upheaval amongst the civilian population. Times have changed, however, some of the old ways are still echoed in modern society. The assassination of JFK caused chaos in the media and is an event that is still talked about today, and still holds weight, decades after. Althought one might argue that it is injust to position one person above another (aren’t we all humans?), this has always been the case within social communities and nations.

A great philosopher once said “without conflict, there would be no change.” One might argue that change is necessary and has enabled us as humans to reach the position we are in today. Therefore, conflict is necessary. However, the idea of change does not necessarily ring the same bell as the idea of conflict and often we believe that one can occur without the other. This is not the case. The Tiananmen Square Massacre began as a peaceful protest. A group of students, unhappy with the current government regime, trying to bring about a change. Yet, we all know how that turned out. Hundreds of innocent people slaughtered, the government putting a nail in the proverbial coffin of change. In Graham Greene’s ‘The Quiet American’, Pyle is the one wanting to bring about a change. His education in York Harding and stubborn ideals of democray ensure that he meets the same fate as those innocent students in Tiananmen Square. He falls victim to the idea of improving he lives of the Vietnamese, who according to Fowler, just want rice. In the end, it is evident that Pyle paid the highest price, and achieved nothing of what he set out to do.

Althought it is easy to focus solely on the negatives in conflict, positives do exist, even if they are few and far between. Like the Lybian people, the Vietnamese also fought for their political beliefs. The Viet Minh believed in a Communist regime and spent many years in battle with the UN, the French, the Americans, and even their fellow countrymen. After close to a decade of fighting the opposing democratic nations, America finally pulled out of Vietnam, and a few years later, Vietnam became a COmmunist nation. Al the death, destruction and loss had finally resulted in a victory for the people; a victory that has lasted to this day. In this situation, the popular consensus would be that the gains in conflict outweighed the losses. 

As we know, conflict does not only occur on a large scale. Personal conflicts occur frequently and often involves losses such as psychological damage and suffering. The Quiet American illustrated many occasions where this is all too evident. The climax of the novel involves somewhat, a betrayal of Pyle by Fowler, ultimately leading to his death. Although this was arguably in the best interest of Vietnam and may have done a great deal of good on a grand scale, the repurcussions for Fowler and the mental scarring will probably remain with him for the rest of his life. He acknoqledges his fate when he says in the closing line, “I wished there was someone to whom I could say that I was sorry,” summing up the extent of his internal trauma.

Whether the gains outweigh the losses or the other way around is impossible to decide with conviction. One cannot make such a decision considering all the people involved and possible consequences. The only thing that can be said is that in conflict, there is always a gain, and there is always a loss.

Cover of The Quiet American

Munich Massacre

            September 5th, 1972, a day that will never be forgotten by many Israelis for years to come. 11 Israeli athletes were left dead, one German officer was shot, and only five of the eight terrorist were killed. What happen to lead to this horrific event and what actually happen on this bloody day?

            The Olympics were well under way as they entered the second week. The mood was high and everyone seemed to be enjoying themselves. The security itself on the housing grounds was perfectly lessened in order for the athletes and residents to feel less under surveillance and more free.

            This absence of security worried Israeli’s head Shmeul Lalkin. With Israel’s new found independence he was worried for his athletes especially since they were in the country which had persecuted them by the hundreds of thousands only 30 years previous. They Olympic committee had placed the Israel athletes in an isolated corner close to that gate leaving them very open for attack. Although the German police assured Israel participants they would have more security, none was ever provided. Even after repeated attempts to move houses they were ultimately refused and forced to stay at the edge of the town.

            The ironic part about all of this was that they had pre-planned scenarios of terrorist attacks. They had 26 total and number 21 accurately depicted the Palestinians attack on the Israel athletes. No one listened to the 21st plan though because it would interfere with the laxed atmosphere Germany was trying to promote. In any case security was kept minimal and what happen next would always leave a scar on the Olympic games.

            The time was 4:30 in the morning one September 5th, 1972. Everyone was sound asleep after a long day of Olympic games. With the quietly sneaking on to the premises were eight heavily armed Palestinian terrorist. With great agility and strength they hopped the six-foot fence surrounding the village. Although many people saw them it was not unusual for athletes around the camp to hop the fence instead of walking all the way to the entrance. With weapons hidden in their “athletic” bags they made it uninterrupted to the Israeli rooms.

            Stolen keys in hand the men enter the two apartments housing the Israel athletes. Although they made it all this way without a commotion when they opened the door they awoke the nearly 300lb wresting referee Yossef Gutfreund. With all of his force he slammed his body against the door in order to allow his fellow teammates escape out the back. All the while he is yelling “Hevre tisalku!” or “guys get out of here!”

            The chaos began as wrestling coach Moshe Weinberg attacked the kidnappers as the other athletes tried to escape. With a mighty blow he knocked one terrorist completely unconscious and stabbed another with a fruit knife. He was soon shot to death.

            Soon after, the terrorist had rounded up all their hostages and by 9:30 they had announced that they were indeed Palestinian and demanded the release of 200 Arab prisoners. 

            The Germans were now in a bind. Do they negotiate with these terrorist who later revealed they were part of a break away radical terrorist group called the PLO.  The police and the PLO came to plan where a Boeing 727 would take the terrorist and the Israeli’s to Cairo. Everything seemed to be going in the favor of these radical terrorists. What they did not know though was that the German police force was setting up a ambush at the airfield where the plan was going to pick them up.

            When the head of Mossad from Israel arrived to finalize the plan he was astonished at the lack of military personnel and lights at the airfield in order to capture these trained terrorist. In his words “the Germans were useless. Useless, all the way.”

            As the Palestinian terrorist the majority of the German police abandon their position leaving five snipes to take on eight heavily armed men. At 10:40 the group of terrorist and the hostages landed on the airfield. Realizing it was a trap the terrorist took defensive positions and began a firefight with the German snipers. Bullets began to fly everywhere; the airfield became a small battlefield. The Germans had no idea what to do. An hour into this fight the Germans were finally able to get heavily armored cars on to the airfield but amidst all the chaos they shot some of their own men. The armored cars brought enough fear to the terrorist that one of them reached for a grenade and tossed it into the helicopter filled with the Israeli’s. Igniting the fuel tanks the helicopter exploded killing all inside. The survivors on the other helicopter were quickly shot. The screams from the athletes brought terror to the Germans across the airfield. Eleven Israelis, five Palestinians and one German police officer died during the Munich tragedy.

            This event had such an impact on the world who had soon come to realize that terrorism was not confined to just the Middle East. In many ways this was like the 9/11 of the 1970’s. In the months and years following the Israelis special forces carried out operation “wrath of God” in order to get revenge on the Palestine terrorist. 

They also said that prosecutors had originally been told he would be tried for minor crimes involving a camel licence and fish farm irregularities.

The Libyan government and ICC are in dispute over who will try Mr Gaddafi.

Libya’s governing National Transitional Council insists that he should be tried in the country, but the ICC says the Libyans are obliged to co-operate with the war crimes court at The Hague and should hand him over.

‘Legal black hole’

The statement from Saif al-Islam’s defence counsel said that both they and the defendant had been informed earlier that there was not enough evidence to pursue him for “serious crimes”.

It alleges that the Libyan authorities “performed a dramatic volte face” when faced with a deadline for surrendering Mr Gaddafi to the ICC and said they wanted to investigate him for war crimes.

The ICC said Col Gaddafi’s most prominent son was being kept in a “legal black hole” and “deprived of his rights”.

For its part, the Libyan government says a special court is being built to try Saif al-Islam and it is fitting that he should be tried on Libyan soil.

            ”Let the ghosts of Colfax have the first word. They do not rest in peace; their bones have been restless.” These are the first couple sentences of the book The Colfax Massacre, written by Leeanna Keith. These two sentences just give us a glimpse of what is to later happen in this unnecessary massacre.

            The community located at Colfax started around 1832 as a result to a huge log jam in the Red River. There was a senator named John C Calhoun who would become a huge voice in the South. As relatives from back home in Europe were coming to the Americas, the Calhoun’s invested heavily in slavery. Calhoun’s plantation was huge and therefore the profit just as big, making $167,000 in one year which today would be $3.5 million dollars.

            As a child of one and a half years old, Meredith Calhoun broke his back after a hard fall from within his maid’s arms. This period of time after 1836 would be a tragic time for the Calhoun family. John Taylor died at age four in July of 1842. Meredith Calhoun, Jr., died at age six in 1846. This left only one daughter and a son, Marie Marguerite Ada Calhoun who they called Ada, and then William, known as Willie. These two were the only children to survive and make it to adulthood. Soon after all of this they moved to France mainly on the discovery of a doctor who could help Willie’s back. When Willie was 15, he returned to the United States and had learned to ride a horse. Willie would become the master of the Red River plantations with the help of his family’s fortune.

            During the civil war, Calhoun went with the Confederates as he watched his next-door neighbor being threatened of assassination for expressing his hatred of the Confederates. Some of Calhoun’s slaves joined the cause of war and were part of the colored infantry. Willie stayed at home during the war and witnessed the boat Champion No. 3’s demise and terrible aftermath.

            After the war, planters like Willie tried hard to get the labor of their former slaves after they had been freed. The population of blacks greatly reduced after the war, from 15,000 to around 5,000. Some were killed in battle and some after being free didn’t want to stay near their former owners, and then some traveled far searching for their lost family members to reunite.

            After the war, African Americans contributed $1 million for educational programs. In Louisiana there were 178 schools, mostly surrounding New Orleans. The schools in this state served more than 14,000 students who were mainly adults. It was said “that a greater number of colored than white people in this State can read and write. (50)” Some schools in the area were safe, but others like the school near Cheneyville had to close down after there was repeated threats made to the teacher’s life. Another teacher who was black was whipped  as well has kidnapped, had his horse stolen, and his saddle burned. Other schools were just as unlucky. “Threatening letters have been sent us; bricks have been thrown through our windows; [and] dead cats dropped into our cistern. (52)” There was 50 schools in the area who paused all classes since  there was a lack of teachers because of the safety issues.

            William Calhoun was committed to the education of black children. He had sympathy for them and also wanted their education for business calculations. Calhoun wanted to be a political figure so he ran for office. Willie won the April 1868 election to the upper house of the Louisiana legislature, who among him included two African Americans.

            “Even after a gang of whites shot at the teacher, breaking the window and tearing up the classroom walls, pupils of all ages continued to attend classes at the freedmen’s school at Frazier’s Mill. (62)” These students were dedicated to their educations even at the beginning of the rise of the Klan. Groups of white people went around threatening to burn down black schoolhouses, and anything else to attempt to frighten them. Hoods and costumes weren’t always used at this point, but the Klan’s main signature was fire, as well as burning states with symbols attached. Murder, a Klan group said they were destined to deliver the largest number of victims in the history of racial violence. Colfax developed as a “black man’s town.” Whites referred to it as “the Mecca of bad and desperate negroes from everywhere. (78)”

            There was trouble after the election of 1872. The courthouse in Colfax was seized by local blacks. Some blacks often told the whites the whites that they intended to kill them all, keeping only the young women so they could start a new breed. They said that no matter what the age or sex was, no one would be spared. One white recalled, “The open threats of the negroes were to kill the white men and violate the white women. (90)” Both the whites and blacks prepared for a fight that was to come.

            Whites stole horses from local areas and took young men to help with the fight to come. They created army-style squadrons who each had a leader. They scouted for the arrival of new recruits. The whites even got a 4-inch cannon from the deck of a steamship from the Navy. The fight would take place on Easter Sunday.

            The white leader of the battle, a Christopher Columbus Nash, was a former lieutenant. They were going to flank the blacks held up at the courthouse. There was a sniper on the courthouse roof who was taking shots at the whites. The whites advanced their lines hoping to take control of the building. Cannon fire penetrated defenders of the courthouse and caused the first fatality of the fight.

            The blacks were pretty much surrounded and some tried escaping to a nearby rode, but were shot in the process. The whites threw a torch into the courthouse and started the building on fire. A black man tore the sleeve from his white shirt and put it out the window saying that they surrender. No one knew for sure if it was actually supposed to be a flag of truce. The blacks had only shot four major people on the other side. They took out two of the artillery team and two men trying to capture the building. The blacks didn’t have the taste for killing and didn’t fire often as you can see in the number of white casualties. Black bodies fell at the door of the courthouse and started piling up. There was a scent of burning flesh as a lot of people couldn’t get out. Some blacks went underneath the courthouse hoping that they wouldn’t be found but when the white men did find them they shot them many times. Most of them had anywhere from three to twelve bullet holes in them.

            C.C. Nash wanted to set the blacks free and not have a mass murder but some other whites didn’t agree with this and wanted them all dead. They took the remaining blacks as prisoners and told them that they were only going to kill the wounded. “The white men told the remaining prisoners to line up and prepare to be marched to the sugarhouse, where they would spend the night and be set free in the morning. (105)” The whites did not do what they said and ended up executing most of the prisoners. When the sun rose in the next morning, the whites scanned the area looking for wounded blacks that tried to escape. They found many and shot them dead on the spot. After the massacre there were over 150 black men dead but only three whites. Many families of the blacks of the massacre that were still alive were afraid to go to the site and find the body of their family. They wanted to bury the bodies but many were left unburied for a few days after the bloody fight.

            This historical event was sad and I think unnecessary. The white men didn’t need to kill all of the blacks that they ended up killing. They told the blacks that they would be set free in the morning but that didn’t happen. As far as the book goes, I did enjoy it but my opinion is that the background information was a little long but necessary to understand what was going on at the time. I learned a lot about how things were in the later 1800s and how even though the blacks were freedmen, the whites hated them even more when they had some power. There was a lot of details in this book about the blacks that I hadn’t known before. 

monument Pembantaian Westerling in South Sulawesi

By reason for looking the ‘extremists, robbers, criminals, and killers’, Westerling troops entered the villages. Actually they looked for the strugglers of Indonesia. They used strategy of Counter Insurgency by their way. They were not held on officially stipulation of Counter Insurgency (about intelligence, civil society and prisoner).

Everyone who was assumed as a dangerous person was killed. They were not only use method of shooting gun, but also other cruel method. According a book that written by Horst H. Geerken, Westerling was not only instruct to shoot nape but also ordered beheading. Hundreds of sacks that filled heads were wasted in the sea to erase the trace.

Target of killing was spread, not only people who assumed as terrorists, extremist, criminal, robber and murderers, but also the innocence people. Including the people who had been jailed first were due to some reasons. They were take out from jail, and then were killed.

Thousands of people dead in some villages in South Sulawesi. Batua village, Tanjung Bunga village, Kalikuang village, Jongaya village, Polobangkeng village, Gowa and the others.  But the greatest victim of Westerling is Incident of Galung Lombok on February 2, 1947.

On 1947, Indonesian Government in front of UN claimed that the victim of slaughter Westerling was 40,000. But Dutch Government, on 1969, predicted the victims achieve 3000-5000. Whereas Captain Westerling said ‘only’ 600 dead.

Captain Westerling

Now, the victims of Westerling have new hope to get justice. The winning of victims of Rawagede case, give them a hope. 9 widows of victims, representative all victims will sue Dutch government.  Initiation has been done through KUKB (Komite Utang Kehormatan Belanda, Committee of Dutch Honorary Debts) and a lawyer of human rights, Liesbeth Zegveld.

“They especially need recognition of their suffering and also apology,” Lisbeth Zegveld said, like reported by site of Netherlands Radio of broadcasting Indonesia. Lisbeth Zegveld was a lawyer of victims of Rawagede tragedy.

However, what Westerling and his troops did is a crime. War crime! Hopefully the people of South Sulawesi get justice.

 (Images from Google)

On January 23, 1870, perhaps the most outrageous act of ethnic repression was carried out by the US cavalry, when they massacred most of an American Indian tribe, the Piegans. The dead were mostly women and children in this possibly greatest slaughter ever of native Americans by U.S. troops.

 While the Blackfoot Confederacy – Blood, Piegan and Blackfoots – had endured hostile relations with local white settlers for several years things came to a head when, in 1869, Piegan warrior Owl Child stole several of horses. His victim, one Malcolm Clarke, tracked him and beat him in front of his peers.

 The humiliated, Owl Child led a rogue Piegan band in pursuit of Clarke, killing him, the reason a band of cavalry – led by Major Eugene Baker – was sent by General Sheridan to track the killers and punish them. It was this troop that, on January 23, 1870, received a scout report telling of a Piegan group camped along the Marias River.

 Dawn saw 200 dismounted troopers spread out in ambush positions around the camp, awaiting orders to open fire. When chief Heavy Runner appeared, he approached the troops waving a safe-conduct paper he had been earlier presented with.

Army scout Joe Kipp shouted that the cavalry had found the wrong camp, but was silenced by Baker, who ordered his men to open fire. Heavy Runner fell, and the ensuing massacre of the unprotected. Indian camp was brutal, 173 innocents, mainly elderly, women and children dying in the hail of bullets.

 140 other Piegans were taken prisoner, later released with no food, no clothing and no horses, meaning that the 90-mile trek to Fort Benton, saw many of these poor refugees freezing to death on the march. The incredibly callous and unfeeling murderer Baker never even found the tribe members he was looking for, because they had escaped to Canada.

Despite a brief Congressional storm of outraged protest at the time, General Sherman issued a press denial of any military guilt, blaming the alcoholism of Major Baker for both the massacre and failure to capture the right Indians, an official investigation into the incident never taking place.

This little-known incident was every bit as significant and damning as other dreadful acts of savagery by the US military, like Bear River or Washita, where massacres also took place, but, history has overlooked it.

No monument was ever erected to mark the site of the mass Piegan grave, but it should not ever be forgotten. America has its own share of dirty secrets and atrocities, something nobody should ever overlook.

      The news of the massacre didn’t break to the American public until journalist Seymour Hersh was told the story by Vietnam veteran Ron Ridenhour (PBS 2005). Ridenhour heard of the massacre by members of Charlie Company. After submitting an ignored appeal to Congress, the White House, and the Pentagon he went to Hersh to get the story published. Two months before Hersh’s story was to be published Calley was charged with murder (PBS, 2005).

Sources

PBS. “The My Lai Massacre.” PBS. March 29, 2005. Web. Retrieved from       http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/vietnam/trenches/my_lai.html

            On December 17th, 1944 an American battalion were caught by an SS force. The force captured 150 POWs. Roughly 80 of the men were shot and killed and their bodies were left behind. This became known as the Malmedy Massacre. Once news of the event spread the Allied forces ordered that all SS forces be killed on sight.

            American forces began their first counterattack on December 23, 1944. The counterattack included the targeting from both sides on aircraft. After 20 days of fighting the Americans lost 460 aircraft while the Germans lost 277. The Americans were able to come back from the loss; however it left the German forces weakened. On January 7th, 1945 Hitler decided to end all offensive operations. The Battle of the Bulge claimed 70,000 to 81,000 American casualties, 1,400 British, and 60,000 and 104,000 German. More than 100,000 soldiers were claimed by the battle (DigitalHistory, n.d.).

Source

DigitalHistory. “World War II, December-January 1944.” DigitalHistory. n.d. Web.    Retrieved from http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1753.html.