Yes, a thousand years ago European Christians responded to the call of Pope Urban II and took up arms to liberate the Holy Land from the infidels. On the journey eastward, the first Crusaders murdered and pillaged a number of Jewish communities, and when they conquered Jerusalem in 1099, they slaughtered unknown numbers of Muslims and Jews within the walls of the city. As historian Kenneth Harl explains in his history of the period, the primary motivation of those who joined the First Crusade was the belief that by "taking the cross" they would achieve remission of sins. But memo to Islamic fanatics: that was a millennium ago. In the intervening 10 centuries, Christians have become the most irenic of confessions. And even in the immediate aftermath of 1099, the Crusaders provided a better life to their Muslim subjects than they had known under Muslim rule (marred as it was by warfare among the Abbasids, Umayyads and Seljuk Turks).
Further, the Crusades, as aggressive as they seem to modern eyes, were a response to the staggering expansionism of the Muslim armies as they spread their faith throughout the Near East during the three centuries following Mohammed's death.
Every aggressor paints himself a victim -- Hitler had his grievances, too, we recall. But what is truly staggering about the bin Laden tape is his call for Muslims to take up arms against the peacekeeping force in Darfur. Three hundred thousand African Muslims have been murdered and two million displaced by raiders (the Janjaweed) working in concert with the Islamic government of Sudan. A small force from the African Union has been overwhelmed. President Bush has called for NATO involvement. On April 30, a broad coalition of Christians, Jews and human rights organizations will hold a "Rally to Stop Genocide" in Washington, D.C. Do the Islamists call for aid? Do they offer it? On the contrary, bin Laden calls for "mujahadin . . . to prepare all that is needed for a long-term war against the Crusaders and thieves in Western Sudan."