You are the one that first brought up Protestantism, not me. I was just replying to your false accusation.
You brought up an article that defends the Roman Catholic Crusades, something which is strange for a protestant to do but which I've seen regularly many times before.
No I don't trust you, because you have proven untrustworthy.
You're being spiteful, like you usually are when you're proven mistaken. You don't learn when you already think you know it all.
I am not interested in the history of the Latin Empire.
It's a direct result of the Crusades, a regime of conquest and exploitation aimed at the destruction of Orthodoxy and the triumph of the Papacy, having nothing to do with the alleged aims of the Crusades in defending the Holy Land from Islam.
It directly contradicts what you think the Crusades were, just like the Northern Crusades for example;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Crusades
Which were entirely about the conquest and enslavement of Northern and East European peoples by Roman Catholic Germanic peoples, and nothing to do with the Holy Land. An entire Crusading Order, the Teutonic Knights, switched from the Holy Land crusades to the far more profitable wars against Slavs and Baltic farmers;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Order
They conquered lands which later became the Prussian core of today's Germany.
So of course you're not interested in knowing, which is contemptible and stupid.
But man is a fickle and disreputable creature and perhaps, like a chess-player, is interested in the process of attaining his goal rather than the goal itself.