tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251777016037497783.post2932095190467227389..comments2023-12-14T20:02:51.470-06:00Comments on The Heavy Anglophile Orthodox: On crusaders and misguided Crusade apologiasMatthew Franklin Cooperhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15233216128641267240noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4251777016037497783.post-58776342525491073012015-02-18T21:17:08.314-06:002015-02-18T21:17:08.314-06:00You wrote: It is not merely that the Crusaders beh...You wrote: It is not merely that the Crusaders behaved literally worse than the Goths of Alaric when it came to Jerusalem, or to Constantinople, or to Jews practically anywhere.<br /><br />The Goths of Alaric never came within a thousand miles of Jerusalem, so I wonder why you mention them. <br /><br />The problem is you speak of "the crusaders." Different folk became crusaders with differing motivations. The overwhelming majority did so because they wanted the Holy Land to be open to Christians. (The region had recently been taken over by a group far more vicious than the IS and almost as evil as George Bush's Americans.) <br /><br />No Jews suffered. That's just a fact. There were some trashy criminals and hangers on to the First Crusade that did attack Jews in the Rhineland. You seem not to know the bishops in those cities defended the Jews, often at the cost of their lives. Those that committed the crimes were not themselves crusaders. <br /><br />Again to generalize about many thousands of folk over a period of 200 years is just.... well silly and stupid. <br /><br />Best Jan RogozinskiJan Rogozinskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13928697255558664209noreply@blogger.com