Historian- Obama ignorant on Crusades

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/08/historian-i-dont-think-the-president-knows-very-much-about-the-crusades/

Yep. He truly is ignorant of many things and not only this.

This is one of those numerous times that the liberals don't want to look at what lead up to the Crusades.

It would offend their world view to think that the Muslims in the Middle east put the Christians previously in control of those lands to the sword if they didn't flee as the Muslim power grew.

*****SMILE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fNY0JuATpQ

University of St. Louis Historian Thomas Madden says Obama’s comments reveal an ignorance of history.

“I don’t think the president knows very much about the Crusades,” Madden told ABC News. “He seems to be casting them as an example of the distortion of Christianity and trying to compare that to what he sees as a distortion of Islam in the actions of ISIS.

“The initial goal of the Crusades was to give back lands to Christians that had been conquered, due to Muslim conquests,” Madden added.

ABC News reports that while no reliable estimate of deaths during the Crusades exists, “the massacre of over 2,700 Muslim prisoners by Richard the Lionheart” is well-documented.

University of London Historian Thomas Asbridge also told ABC News that the suggestion of any causal link between the Islamic State terrorists and the medieval Crusades is “grounded in the manipulation and misrepresentation of historical evidence.”

Obama is a shyster

Sal wrote:The Crusades were wars of conquest and aggression.

This bullshit about them being defensive wars began as political polemics in the wake of 9/11.

Who said it was defensive? You have to occupy something to play defense moron. The Christians just wanted the land back that the Muslims took by force/sword. That required an "offensive."

Sal wrote:The Crusades were wars of conquest and aggression.

This bullshit about them being defensive wars began as political polemics in the wake of 9/11.

Wrong... ignorant wrong. Just admit you're going to defend obama's talkingpoint revision version no matter what.

It was awful all those local Muslims forcing out some folks from London who wanted a peaceful beach vacation.....revisionism......they even destroyed their beach Umbrellas....we had no choice but to send crusading armies in the name of god to get those umbrellas back.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:The Christians just wanted the land back.....  

The land was never promised to Christians...

If one's to believe the monotheistic beliefs that both these religions sprang from then it wasn't promised to either of these groups.

Should we tell the group that it was promised to that they can have the parts of Jordan, Egypt, and a few other countries, that the 'promised group' did take over and then were told to pull out of over the last few decades back?

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diOuUYcenW0

Truth is, the Muslims had controlled Jerusalem and the former "Holy Land" for several centuries by the time the Crusades began. The Crusaders owned zero property in Palestine. They wanted control over the birthplace of Christianity.

That at least was the excuse they used to steal from and rape and torture and slaughter thousands of people in the lands they invaded.

What in Hell are you Christian die-hards trying to do to justify the Crusades which represent one of humanities darkest, most bloody times?

I guess for you guys, if it's evil done by Christians it isn't terrorism. Right?

Call for Semi Sane Markle -- he'll tell you the Crusades weren't evil, and neither was the KKK, or the many lynchings done by Christian Americans, or the inquisition, or the millions of American natives wiped out by Catholic invaders.

You are all batshit crazy anyway and refuse to deal with facts.

You're no different than Islamic Jihadists -- corrupt, cruel, bloodthirsty, without honor or integrity. And your god and theirs is a creepy, nasty bastard.