<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffcc" text="#000000">
On 12/18/2009 07:59 AM, Ed Hurst wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:op.u44w0sx8ogx5dc@localhost" type="cite">On Fri,
18 Dec 2009 00:16:59 -0600, Fred A. Miller
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:fmiller@lightlink.com"><fmiller@lightlink.com></a> wrote:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">That is correct......He chose to do that. I
don't know that is what we're all supposed to do now. As to the
Crusades, there's much in current history books that's not accurate.
One needs to have done proper study for many years to be able to
discuss that issue intelligently. I don't believe any of us here fit
that qualification.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I assert we are supposed to do that. And I wonder if you realize how
insulting that last line sounds? With my degree in Social Studies
(including large doses of history), there is no way I could qualify? My
professors, with PhDs, called me a professional historian. I may not
really know, but it's hard to imagine that wasn't designed merely to
shut someone up. When does someone gain the right to disagree, brother?
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
That isn't what I said, Ed! IF you spent extensive, NOT cursory, time
studying that period and ALL that happened, that is well documented,
then yes you could speak with authority. I can't.....won't even try.
Most of what I have available isn't the truth.....revisionist garbage
and I know it. I didn't intend any insult to anyone, just stating what
I know to be the extent of study required and that MOST don't have it.<br>
<br>
Fred<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
A REVOLUTIONARY IDEA!
'Time to put Nana Pelosi in a home!'</pre>
</body>
</html>