stretched truthes

[TMA_1]

I saw this show on discovery, it was really early and I dont usually like those channels as they are usually full of half truthes and generalities, but I figured what the heck.

It was this show on a thing called "cable in the classroom" specifically made for kids so they can enjoy and learn a bit of history in their classes.

Well it was talking about the crusades, and it basically was trying to show that the muslims were not the horrible people that many make them out to be in history, which is totally true. In fact I dare say the ottoman empire was on par with places like Byzantium (one of my favorite civilizations). As I was saying though.

They were talking about it and instead of trying to show the muslims in a good light, they made the catholic church look horrific! dont get me wrong in many ways it was, but instead of showing the truths on both sides they didnt.

For example they started with the Pope attacking Saladin, saying that all the Pope was interested in was taking back Jerusalem, and nothing else. I am not kidding, it was disturbing.

They made it out that the catholic church was the aggressor, in which may partially be true, but they didnt mention WHY the catholic church did what it did in the first crusades.

They didnt explain that the church was pushed out of many places in israel including jerusalem, and many who wished to make pilgrimages were not allowed, not even the other orthodox churches for awhile (later they were allowed, but not hte catholic church for many years). Not only this but many catholic Prelates were killed. Whats worse is that the church was not allowed to visit it's holy sites and was pushed out of being able to worship around them.

They never made mention of this, and because of that the catholic church came out to be the enemy-without-cause in the documentary. It just kinda frustrated me because it just wasent fair.

Not only this, but when they showed how Saladin did his business, they never mentioned the autrocities he committed, but did mention the autrocities of King Richard (the so-called lion hearted).

I personally love Saladin as a historical figure, and all rulers have done good and ill in their history, but I think it just went a bit too far. It seems a lot of shows are doing this these days, just kinda frustrating.

[danielsh]

Wasn't Urban II just a great big giant imperialist? I never learned much to indicate that he had any good reasons for starting the Crusades... which is not to suggest that there could have been any good reasons for starting the Crusades ;-).

[Caid Ivik]

Most english-speaking nations see only Saladin vs Richard, the 3rd of great crusades, when it is talked about crusades. However it was Saladin who at first attacked the kingdom of Jerusalem, vasal-state of Byzantium and ally of Plantagenets. And also, largest composition of this army was under command of emperor Friedrich II., tough he died before he could reach the target. Church played here minimal initiative, as Pope was under direct control of him, as we all know...