Blame Karen Armstrong and her ilk for this campaign of disinformation. It's less Muslim propaganda than it is self-loathing white liberal propaganda.
One of Armstrong's books presents the crusades as ultimately futile, with only a relatively minor impact on the mighty Muslim empire -- and THEN she goes on to describe them as being so horrendous that present day Muslims are still traumatized by them! Which would seem somewhat contradictory.
Johnathan Riley-Smith is probably the most highly regarded Crusades historian. The only other historian with comparable scholarship to Riley-Smith is Gerhardt Meyer, author of 'The Crusader States'.
Posted at 2006-03-20 10:06:22 [PermaLink]For the record, I don't think the crusades were a "good" thing, but the frequent portrayal of these conflicts as a straight Christian-vs-Muslim struggle is a gross distortion of history. There were Christian states that allied with Muslim states against other Christian states, for goodness sake! It wasn't as simple as KOH and other Hollywood treatments make it out to be.
Speaking of Hollywood, audiences here in the West are currently watching the movie "V For Vendetta," in which eeeviiill Christian fascists oppress poor Muslims and ban the Koran. Meanwhile, in the real world, an Afghanistan man is at present on trial for his life on the charge of converting to Christianity. One of the pieces of evidence being used against him is his copy of the Bible. He's been told he'll be spared if he turns back to Islam. And he WON'T DO IT.
I now wait, with bated breath, for the Wachowski brothers to film their totally cool cutting-edge movie about THIS story...
The basic equation still holds true--if the rock-worshippers lose, civilisation wins.
Posted at 2006-03-20 18:31:32 [PermaLink]Oh, I don't know about that. I've known some pretty decent Rolling Stones fans. ;)
Posted at 2006-03-21 07:59:11 [PermaLink]Ellie: Including the authour of the post!
Mark
Ottawa