And my point is this:
The Crusades were a worldly, corrupt series of military campaigns that actually led to the downfall of Constantinople (given the sacking thereof). However, here is the point that, evidently, lots of folks are missing, or simply refuse to consider. These were military campaigns wrapped in the cross of Christ, promoted by the alleged vicar of Christ, and promising eternal life to those who died in their prosecution. They showed not the slightest concern for the conversion of the Muslim peoples, and only emboldened the rise of more and more errors in reference to the gospel amongst Roman Catholics. This is what I just do not understand about Christians glorifying this period and the atrocities committed in the name of Christ therein. That is why I said in the op that I really, really doubt that almost any of the Crusade glorifiers have ever sat down across a meal with a Muslim and truly and deeply pleaded with them to consider the claims of Christ, and, I might add, very few of them have sat across the table from a Roman Catholic and spoken of the empty promises of indulgences, masses, and all the other gospel errors that mark that system. There may be some, somewhere, I suppose, but all this stuff just needs to be put aside by anyone and everyone with a serious theological and historical bone in their body.