Historians say film 'distorts' Crusades

The Washington Times ^ | January 18, 2004 | Charlotte Edwardes

[expat_panama]

LONDON

[expat_panama]

 

"Cruelty was not on one side, but on all."

That may be all well and good for history lessons, but where's the BOFO?

Different article, different post, same film same argument.

[expat_panama]

Dang! Looks like the only thing different with the previous post was the title-- ooops!

[ventana]

BOFO? V's wife.

[Gerasimov]

"dangerous to Arab relations."

Someone should tell the Arabs on the current islamic Crusade that car bombs and hijackings are "dangerous to relations with the rest of the world" or at a minimum, are hazardous to your health and your homeland!!

[StonyBurk]

Not to leave out the distinct possability that the longer
the violence against our efforts in Iraq or Afghanistan
continues -- there is real possability such bad behavior
will only increase the legnth of our purported"occupation".
And all this Arabic/Muslim babble about "bloodbaths" will
be interpreted as a very real probability that the ragheads
do NOT want /will not accept the nation of Israel--only its
destruction- a clear obstacle to peace in the region.

[expat_panama]

BOFO?

I may have spelt it wrong-- it's not a chat acronym, it's hollywood for 'box-office'.

[expat_panama]

"dangerous to relations..."

In this case the Brits are acting like idiots.  If anything, we should expect the Arabs to love the idea of Saladin being a good guy.

UNLESS, the movie shows Arabs loosing.  Unlike the USA where everyone joins the side of the poor poor minority, most of the world respects winners, nice or not.  

[big'ol_freeper]

*ping*

[NewRomeTacitus]

http://www.prophetofdoom.net/

[Snuffington]

This whole modern notion that the Crusaders were uncivilized barbarians while the Muslims were civilized, sohpisticated, and peaceful must REALLY stick in the craw of the decendents of the Byzantine Empire - which those Islamic paradigms of virtue brutally invaded, occupied, and STILL hold.

But Terry Jones was still pretty entertaining in the BBC series about the Crusades which was based on this modernist Crusade revisionism. That's probably more than we'll be able to say about this movie.

[NewRomeTacitus]

"Saladin, Saladin...
Have Sword Will Travel"

El Cid, now there was a guy. Cid Vicious.

Just pointing out that any culture that has to resort to making up their heros isn't a culture worth preserving.

[expat_panama]

any culture that has to resort to making up their heros isn't a culture worth preserving.

Then again, most heros are of the 'made to order' type.  Ireland's Brian Buro and England's Alfred the Great come to mind. 

[Nubbin]

...."Mr. Scott's spokesman said that the film portrays the Arabs in a positive light. "It's trying to be fair, and we hope that the Muslim world sees the rectification of history."....

Lookie, lookie at the new PC buzzword.

Oh, no we aren't distorting history, we are RECTIFYING it. Revising history to suit ourselves? Heck no, we are not revising it, merely RECTIFYING it.

[NewRomeTacitus]

Are you sure he wasn't trying to say "rectum-fying"? It's not a real word but comes closer to describing those who attempt to rewrite history for propaganda purposes.
Like our buddy Lumpy Riefenstahl does when he wastes perfectly good film stock.

[TomServo]

"dangerous to Arab relations."

I really don't give a damn about damaging Arab relations.

[Miss Marple]

Well, I am sticking with the version of the Crusades in the 1930's movie starring Henry Wilcoxon, where they sang "The Crusaders Hymn" ("Fairest Lord Jesus") while entering Jerusalem.

[secretagent]

Boffo - 2 f's

[expat_panama]

Boffo - 2 f's

ooops--