To: RobbyS
But we have to have some way of knowing this. You are simply brushing this research aside because it goes against your beliefs.
I don't have any beliefs in this subject. But one analysis that contradicts the traditional majority historical opinion conducted by someone with a strong vested interest using documents solely from one side of the conflict is highly suspicious.
149 posted on
06/18/2004 6:22:50 PM PDT by
gitmo
(Thanks, Mel. I needed that.)
To: gitmo
Gee, I think I said that earlier myself on another thread.
"We did nothing wrong" - Us, 2000
See, we didn't do nothin wrong... lol
150 posted on
06/18/2004 6:28:55 PM PDT by
Havoc
("The line must be drawn here. This far and no further!")
To: gitmo
"The traditional majority"opinion is that of enemies of the Catholic Church. Could that not make it suspect? The animosity of English public opinion--and I am talking about elite opinion-- toward Catholicism was so great that as late as 1940 Prime Minister Churchill could not be seen with the Catholic archbishop of Westminster, even though he liked the man and preferred his company to the archbishop of Canterbury, whom he did not like.
151 posted on
06/18/2004 6:36:45 PM PDT by
RobbyS
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson