Fifteen years ago the AngloZionist Empire begin the third phase of its war against the Serbian nation. It is important to take a few minutes to remember this war because the main purpose of this war was to show to the Russian people what could be done to it if it dared resist. Just as the US had bombed Nagasaki and Hiroshima primarily with the purpose of showing the Soviet Union what it could do to it, so did the AngloZionists bomb the Serbian people living in Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia and Serbia primarily to send a “message” to the Russian people: if you resist – you are next. Besides a massive bombing and cruise missile strikes campaign, the Empire also unleashed the biggest propaganda campaign in history, presenting the Serbs as vicious, crazed, nationalist and sadistic mass murderers and all of their enemies as progressive, freedom loving, democratic and heroic civilians which only had light weapons to resist the massive onslaught of Serbian heavy weapons. The narrative then further hyped the vilification by speaking of Serbian “concentration camps” and massive “ethnic cleansing” campaigns which included “rape as a weapon of war”. Finally, and logically, the AngloZionists concluded that Milosevic was the “new Hitler” and that the Serbs were actually engaging in genocide.
At the time, practically everybody bought that narrative. There were a few exceptions here and there – the independent journalist Michel Collon in Belgium deserves a special mention here with his book MediaMensonges written as early as 1994 – but by and large the Empire’s campaign of “strategic psyops” was a stunning success.
I will return to the topic of this war on a regular basis because a lot of things still must be re-visited and re-explained, especially now that the Muslim world has found itself on the receiving end of exactly the same forces doing exactly the same thing in Libya and Syria. But for the time being, I just want to share an email exchange I had with one upset reader to whom my reply could serve as a useful starting point to begin to set the record straight.
Here is the email which I got last week:
Dear Saker,
Let me first congratulate you on excellent articles and commentaries on your site. I enjoy reading them, and agree with them.
But, of course, there is one thing that bothers me in your writings, your obsession with “suffering” of Serbia and Serbs. Even in today’s article you mentioned 78 days of “suffering” of Serbia. If you really needed good example of suffering from Balkans couldn’t you use Siege of Sarajevo which lasted from 5 April 1992 to 29 February 1996, longer then Siege of Stalingrad, and guess who kept Sarajevo under the siege, yes your dear Serbian fascists.
Few pictures …
https://www.google.ca/search?q=siege+of+sarajevo&client=ubun tu&hs=kzk&channel=fs&tbm=isch& tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei= zIEsU-aLKYOsyAGOmoGAAg&ved=0CE UQ7Ak&biw=1458&bih=774&dpr=1
Enemy of my enemy does not have to be my friend, and a lot of progressive writers loose some of their credibility by portraying Serbs under Milosevic as another victim of US imperialism, they are the same shitty nazies like those who are ruling Ukraine these days. They came in power by coup, they pushed other nations from Yugoslavia, they committed worst crimes during wars in ex-YU mostly in Bosnia, but also in Croatia and Kosovo!
Best,
xxxxx xxxxxx
P.S. I was born and lived for 31 years in Sarajevo until Serbs forced me to leave in 1991.
Here is the text of my reply: (slightly corrected)
Dear xxxxx,Thanks for your email. I have to honestly tell you that while I sympathize with your plight as I would do for the plight of any person suffering the consequences of civil war, I find your arguments wholly unconvincing. First and foremost, you have to ask yourself basic questions:
1) who of the Croats, Bosnian Muslims or Serbs unleashed the devil of nationalism and who stood for a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society? (answer: Croats and Bosnian Muslims)
2) which was the party which decided to use a symbol clearly associated with a Bandera-like regime? (answer: the Croats with their checkerboard)
3) whose side got the support of the so-called international community and even for the USAF to bomb on their behalf? (answer: Croats and Bosnian Muslims)
4) which side did exactly what the Ukies do today and said: ‘we can secede from you, but you cannot secede from us’? (answer: Croats and Bosnian Muslims)
5) which side even got the al-Qaeda types to support them with money, guns and wahabi crazies? (answer: Bosnian Muslims)
6) which side use to hide inside UNPAs or UN safe havens and conduct attacks from there? (answer: Croats and Bosnian Muslims)7) which side was backstabbed by its own people? (answer: Bosnian Serbs whom Milosevic slapped with en embargo)8) which side had the most displaced persons/refugees? (Serbs from Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo)9) which side organized false flag massacres (Markale I and II, Racak) to trigger intervention? (answer: Bosnian Muslims)10) which side had to give up its so-called “heavy weapons” before the US and Croat forces attacked them? (answer: Krajina-Serbs)11) which side turned a formerly progressive and liberal society into an obscurantist and intolerant one as portrayed in the Bosnian movie “Luna’s choice”? (answer: Bosnian Muslims)12) which side had the full 100% support of the US propaganda machine and the NWO media? (answer: Croats and Bosnian Muslims)13) which side produced the worst collaborators with Hitler? (answer: Croats and Bosnian Muslims)14) which side produce the strongest resistance against the Nazis? (answer: Serbs with Tito and Mikhailovich)15) which side managed to get the support of BOTH the various Jewish lobbies AND of the Vatican (answer: the Croats)16) which side benefited from nightly delivery of weapons from NATO and Turkey? (answer: the Bosnian Muslims)17) which side first signed a peace agreement and then reneged on it? (answer: the Bosnian Muslims)18) which side had crimes committed against it never punished by the Hague Tribunal? (answer: the Serbs)Also – let me tell you a little something about myself. I used to do military analysis for, amongst other assignments, the United Nations and I followed the wars in Croatia and Bosnia on day-to-day basis, and not the public stuff , but classified UNPROFOR reports. I also personally interviewed *A LOT* of UNPROFOR officers include 2 UNPROFOR Force commanders. So, believe me, I know what did or did not happen in Bosnia, Croatia and, Kosovo. Yes, there were crazy Serbian nationalists and murderers who committed atrocities, no doubt here at all, but no more and no less then what the Croats or the Bosnian Muslims did. Second, I make a HUGE difference between Milosevic (both an ex-banker AND an ex-communist) and the Bosnian Serb people, including Karadzic and his aides. Milosevic was the scum of the earth, a fake nationalist, fake communist, and real capitalist SOB who betrayed his people at least twice (when he slapped sanctions against the Bosnian Serbs and when he betrayed the Kosovo Serbs), but Federal Forces in Bosnia committed the least atrocities and massacres and some Serbian paramilitay units – like the one of Capitan Dragan – has an excellent record on human rights. So to portray the Serbs as Nazis the way you do is simply not honest and, in the case of a person like me, futile – because I know what was going on behind the propaganda veil.As for the leaders of the so-called “good guys” a lot of them were scum and professional liars (Tudjman, Silajdzic) or maniacs (Itzebegovich). Yes, Milosevic was a piece of shit too, but no worse than these guys.
Your vision is simple: bad Serbs, good Croats and/or good Bosnian Muslims. That is utter nonsense. Like in any other country, in all the ethnic/religious groups of the former Yugoslavia you had a majority of decent but passive people, a certain percentage of sick and evil folks who like to do evil, and a small group of heroes who kept their decency in the middle of the horror around them. And 90% of people did NOT want a way, much less so a civil one. And today, most people in Bosnia understand that they have been used by the US Empire and regret the civilized society and country which they lost. I think that if somebody did a public opinion survey in Bosnia and asked the people: “when you see the outcome today do you think that it worth triggering a civil war at the time?” the vast majority would answer “no”. Well, that civil war was not started by the Serbs.
So, please, don’t come tell me how bad the other guy is. Look at what *your* people did to *themselves* and try to learn something from it.Kind regards,
The Saker
I did not get a reply, nor was I expecting one (though I do expect today’s post to trigger an avalanche of outraged comments). The crisis in the Ukraine is far from over and there are other events to which I would like to turn to – like the absolutely barbaric condemnation to death of 528 members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The situation in Syria also deserves much more coverage then the zero-coverage I have been giving it since the crisis began in the Ukraine. Alas, I simply do not have to time to reply to all the comments and emails I get every day, nevermind providing a focused coverage on several “fronts” so I always pick the one which appears to most important to me. All this is to explain that I will not be able to reply, especially in detail, to what I expect to be quite a few irate comments to this post. I sincerely apologize for that, but I promise to come back to this topic as soon as things cool down elsewhere.
For one thing, I consider it my moral obligation to address my many Muslim readers with a plea to “connect the dots” and realize that they have been lied to not only about Chechina, but also about Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. I know that some of them have been reading this blogs for years and they know my views on nationalism, religion and Islam and that I really do try to live by Malcolm X’s motto “I am for truth, no matter who tells it”. The Empire’s propaganda machine tried hard in presenting the wars in Chechnia and in the former Yugoslavia as a war of Orthodox Christians against Islam. Sadly, this propaganda campaign was nothing short of a total triumph, especially amongst Muslims. So today I want to submit to you all, but especially to my Muslim readers, the following exchange with a first-rate Muslim scholar and academic to whom I had written to express my enthusiasm for his book and my issue with only once sentence in it. (I am not going to reveal the name of this person out of respect for him, especially since he is going through a great deal of suffering right now). Here is what I wrote:
Dear Sir,
My name is xxxxxx xxxxxxx and I am writing to you for two reasons. First, to express my gratitude for your most interesting essay on Wahhabism which was recommended to me by a Muslim friend as “the best book on Wahhabism”. I can only agree wholeheartedly. At the end of the book though, one sentence immensely disappointed me and made me decide to write directly to you.
On page 68 you wrote that the US global war on terror was “waged in concert with allies such as Russia, its hands bloodied with the Muslims of Chechnya”. I take issue with literally every letter of that sentence.
1) First, we now know from the testimony of Sibel Edmonds that not only did the USA not help Russia but, quite to the contrary, the USA fully supported the Chechen insurgency.
2) You make it sound like the wars in Chechnia were wars opposing Russians and Chechens. This is also patently false. There never was a united “Chechen side”, not in 1995 and, even less so, in 1999. In fact, I would credit the Chechens of Akhmad and Ramzan Kadyrov with killing at least as many insurgents as the Federal Forces did.
3) You also make it sound like the wars in Chechnia were wars opposing Muslims and, by implication, non-Muslims. This is also patently false. Not only was there always a Chechen opposition to the insurgency, but there were plenty of non-Chechen Muslims in the Federal forces, especially so during the 2nd Chechen war which, after all, began with a Chechen attempt to invade Dagestan where Muslim Dagestanis fought to their death to stop this invasion.
4) Now let’s take the issue of whose hands were bloodied with Muslim blood. Do you really not know of the constant violence which was meted out by the government of the independent ‘Ichkeria’ against its own citizens? Of all people, you should know best how Wahabis treat non-Wahabi Muslims! Do you really believe that when the Wahabis got to power in Chechnia they treated the local Muslims any better than what they have always done everywhere in the past and which your book so well explains? Why is it that when (putatively) non-Muslim Federal Forces kill Muslims this deserves a special mention whereas when (putatively) “Muslims” such as the Wahabis kill (real) Muslims this gets no mention.Now, you wrote the book in 2002 and you can be excused for not having guessed at that time what Chechnia would look like a decade later. I will honestly admit that I also could not have imagined that. Still, I think that now that we see the kind of butchery the Wahabis are yet again engaged in in Syria, and following the disgraceful events which happened in Syria, you might want to ask yourself who the “good guys” and who the “bad guys” really were in Chechnia. I submit to you that what Putin and Kadyrov did is save the Chechen people from the horrors of Wahabism and that this is exactly the situation Assad in now facing in Syria. The only difference is that Putin was always represented by the (US funded) Muslim propaganda as some kind of bloodthirsty monster and Kadyrov as his “puppet”.
In conclusion I want to express to you my deep disappointment that a person with your phenomenal culture and knowledge would fall for the “wrong or right – my Ummah” reflex. According to you, the Muslims in Bosnia, in Kosovo and in Chechnia were each time the “good guys” and the victims. As a specialist of the war in Bosnia I can assure you that this is false. The sad and admittedly embarrassing reality is that in all three of these wars the Muslims were used by the US as a tool for its imperial designs, just like the “Mujahedeen” had been in Afghanistan a few decades earlier. In Kosovo, the native Serbian population was ethnically cleansed, replaced by a regime of gangsters and Mafia dons, the USA opened its huge “Camp Bondsteel” at the cost of a barbaric bombing of the entire civilian population of Serbia and Montenegro and now Kosovo is a criminal black hole. Is it not a disgrace for the Muslim world that it blindly sided with the Kosovar drug lords?
Sir, I see Wahhabism as a huge danger for the entire planet. As long as it was a small crazy sect in the sands of Arabia it was ugly and bloodthirsty, but it was limited. But as soon as the (always “brilliant”) US CIA cooked up the plan to federate various neo-Wahabi movement into one worldwide movement, which later became known as al-Qaeda, Wahhabism became a danger to us all, but first and foremost to Muslims and, amongst Muslims, first and foremost for the two forms of Islam the Wahabis hate the most: the Shia and the Sufi. Now this is my key point here: non-Wahabi Muslims need all the allies they can get to deal with this nightmare (just look at the situation in Syria as a proof of this). This, however means, that as long as even the most educated Muslims will instinctively stick to a “wrong or right – my Ummah” reflex you will deny yourself these allies.
Critics of the US and EU policies point at the logical absurdity of using military forces to destroy Wahabis in Mali while at the same time arming the same forces in Syria. I agree, this makes no sense. But what of the mainstream Muslim stance of supporting Wahabis in Chechnia or Bosnia while opposing them in Syria or Egypt? How is that less absurd?
In which country today do we see truly large numbers of Sunni Muslims live with the state protecting them from the Wahabis? In which country does the state have as its declared and official policy to support and defend traditional Sunni Islam against Wahabism? Which country has for the past two years played a key role in not letting the Wahabis over-run Syria? Finally, which is the ONLY major country to have ALWAYS opposed Wahabism, everywhere and at all times, regardless of the pretexts for war?
Russia, of course. The very same Russia you accuse of having Muslim blood on its hands.
This is factually wrong and this is morally wrong too. Finally, it is self-defeating and country-productive as it offends Russians like myself who refuse the Western canard that “all Muslims” are a threat to “our” civilization and that there is a clash of civilization happening.
I, Sir, believe that what Russia did in Chechnia was not “killing Muslims”, at least not deliberately or because of their Islam, but killing many truly evil Wahabi thugs and this is why so many Chechen commanders changed sides and are now deeply grateful to Putin. Putin did not try to shed Muslim blood any more than Assad tries nowadays in Syria. When faced with a violent, vicious, bloodthirsty and aggressive insurgency fully paid for by the Gulf states and supported politically by the USA Putin and Assad simply did the only thing which could save their country, including its Muslim population: they ruthlessly pursued and physically destroyed the Wahabi-run insurgency. I submit to you that all non-Wahabi Muslims owe them a great debt of gratitude.
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter and thank you again for an outstanding book.
Kind regards,
xxxxxx xxxxxxx
(Florida)
This is the reply I got:
Dear Mr. xxxxxxx,There is much that I could say in response to your comments, but I have decided not to expend the effort. After all, you describe yourself as “a specialist of the war in Bosnia.” I don’t know what your credentials are in this respect. Having visited Bosnia both before and after the genocidal war waged against the Muslims, talked with the survivors and bereaved of Srebrenica, seen the soccer fields of Sarajevo turned into cemeteries, prayed in the ruins of mosques destroyed by your fellow Slavs, seen the remnants of the burnt manuscripts of the Orientalni Insitut, talked to some of the women raped by the Serbs … I find your assurance that it is false to regard the Muslims as the “good guys” and the victims quite simply repulsive. As for Kosova, yes there are gangsters there (as there are in your much cherished Serbia), and I can appreciate the fact that Russian mobsters will not welcome the competition. In Chechnya, yes, much of the opposition is Wahhabi-oriented,and the North Caucasus has not produced anyone even remotely comparable to Imam Shamyl of blessed memory, but does this justify the destruction of Grozny, the staged bombings used by Putin to justify the second Chechen war, or the numerous crimes reported by journalists such as Politkovskaya whom the Kremlin found it necessary to assassinate?
Your notion of a diabolical US-Wahhabi alliance against Muslims is at the very best curious. As for Russia being the protector of Muslims to whom a debt of gratitude is owed, are you try to make me laugh?
You are disappointed that I have fallen prey to the “wrong or right – my Ummah” reflex. Plainly what you are suffering from is an advanced case of Pan-Slavism.
I have already written more than I intended. This correspondence is now at an end.
At this point on, I knew that it was futile to try continue a discussion with my correspondent did not want to have, so my reply was short:
Dear Sir,
Though I am disappointed by the lack of substance in it, I thank you for your reply.
And, Sir, *all* the inhabitants of Bosnia are Slavs, including Muslims. As for Pan-Slavism, that silly idea died roughly 200 years ago :-)
Kind regards and all the best,
xxxxxx xxxxxxx
My hope in publishing these exchanges today is to at least set the stage for future discussions, especially with my Muslim readers, about these wars. Why? Because as long as the AngloZionists can divide us they will also rule over us. In France, for example, the Zionist lobby is making truly immense efforts to set the French Muslims against the French Latin Christians because they know that as long as these two groups fight against each other, they themselves will be safe and in control. The French author Alain Soral says that what is taking place is a war between the “Old Testament” world (Judaism and Protestantism”) against the “New Testament” world (Latin and Orthodox Christianity) and that the key strategy used by the Empire is to set Christians against Muslims. As you probably know, I have a big problem with the notion that Latin and Orthodox Christianity are on the same side, today’s events in the Ukraine only prove the opposite, but this is irrelevant here: Soral’s religious education is, frankly, sub-minimal (he considers himself a non-believing “cultural Catholic”), but his political acumen is world-class and what he says about France is absolutely true: the plutocratic elites are now in a complete panic because they see that the “stem French” (local, Latin Christian French) against the “branch French” (first or second generation Muslim immigrant) are joining forces against the Zionist domination of France and that this alliance has a huge potential. Likewise, in Russia, we now see that the strongest and most determined defenders of Russia are the Chechen people (speaking of which: Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov has declared that just as his special forces have killed Doku Umarov, they will hunt down and catch Dmitri Iarosh, “dead or alive – either way is fine by me” said Kadyrov). As for the Resistance on a global scale, we see today that it is lead by Russia (Orthodox, Muslim) then China (Confucianist, Taoist, Buddhist), Iran (Muslim), Syria (Muslim, Christian) and Hezbollah (Muslim). The Empire, of course, tried hard to set Russia against Islam (Chechnia: failed), China against Russia (failed), Islam against Orthodox Christianity (Bosnia, Kosovo: success), Islam against China (in progress), Sunni against Shia (Syria: in progress), Christian against Shia (Lebanon: in progress), Islam against Latin Christianity (France: failed), Sunni against Shia (Iraq: success), Sunni against Shia (Iran: failed), Sunni against Shia (Bahrain: success), Muslim against Christian (Indonesia: in progress), Muslim against Christian (Mali, Sudan: success), etc. This list is incomplete – but I think the point I want to make is clear: the Empire has had a stunning success in using Muslims literally as cannon fodder to fight against its enemies. It is, I submit, therefore absolutely vital for Muslims worldwide to realize this and to refuse to be further lied to. The real enemy of Islam is exactly the same as the real enemy of Christianity: the AngloZionist Empire. Sayyid Qutb did see the real nature of the Empire, as did Malcom X. The real heir of their thought today are not al-Qardawi and degenerate rulers of Saudi Arabia, but people like Sheikh Imran Hussein, Ramzan Kadyrov and Hassan Nasrallah (whose Hezbollah party includes only Muslims, but whose military resistance includes Christians).
What happened to the Serbian people is a grotesque injustice and nothing short of an abomination. It was also the precursor of what happened to the people of Libya and Syria and the Serbian people, now more than ever, have a moral right to have the truth finally be said about their plight. Furthermore, those of us who are determined to resist the Empire need to learn from our mistakes, if only to avoid repeating them in the future. This is the purpose of this post today and I hope that it will be understood by those who will read it.
The Saker
Saker wrote – It is important to take a few minutes to remember this war because the main purpose of this war was to show to the Russian people what could be done to it if it dared resist. Just as the US had bombed Nagasaki and Hiroshima primarily with the purpose of showing the Soviet Union what it could do to it…
Dear Saker, there is one Croatian city called Zadar, the USA destroyed in bombing 90% of the city after the capitulation of Italy.
We the Croats fought against the Serbs and vice verse but the Serbs are not the Russians. Small group of the Croats are trying to explain it to the Croatian public.
These Croats are supporters of the multipolar world and they are friends od Russia and the Russian people i.e. Russophiles, they are also the Croatian patriots.
It might sound strange to you, but it is very truth.
Neka Bog blagosovi hrvatski i ruski narod. Zivjela Hrvatsaka i Rusija.
@Anonymous:It might sound strange to you, but it is very truth.
Not at all, I fully believe you. Believe me, I don’t mistake all Croats with Tudjman any more than I would mistake all Serbs with Milosevic. That is exactly my point – that this war in the former Yugoslavia was artificially set up from the outside and all the local people were, to one degree or another, manipulated and victimized.
Kind regards and many thanks,
The Saker
Dear Saker
This is the date when this great nation called Russia recognized Croatia – 17.2.1992.
This is the date when our new colonial master ( USA ) recognized Croatia -7.4.1992.
We the Croatian patriots remember it very well but this NATO vassal regime in Croatia is trying to delete it from our memory.
http://www.mvep.hr/hr/vanjska-politika/bilateralni-odnosi/datumi-priznanja/
It is a pity that this Croatian regime, NATO/EU servent is inciting the Croats against Russia.
May God forgive us the Croats for our sins toward Russia.
Here you are again Br. Saker, setting things straight and I for one appreciate it. Thank you for the voice.
God Bless you and yours as always!!
Peace
Zainab
“the Empire also unleashed the biggest propaganda campaign in history, presenting the Serbs as vicious, crazed, nationalist and sadistic mass murderers and all of their enemies as progressive, freedom loving, democratic and heroic civilians which only had light weapons to resist the massive onslaught of Serbian heavy weapons. The narrative then further hyped the vilification by speaking of Serbian “concentration camps” and massive “ethnic cleansing” campaigns which included “rape as a weapon of war”. Finally, and logically, the AngloZionists concluded that Milosevic was the “new Hitler” and that the Serbs were actually engaging in genocide.”
Former NYT journalist Chris Hedges, another famous “dissident” gatekeeper who ranks up there with Chomsky for his uncanny unwillingness to see Jewish power as having any meaningful influence, loves to regurgitate these propaganda canards against the Serbs. It is almost always included as a throwaway line mentioned in passing while making some unrelated point that Milosevic was a nationalist (or fascist) moron just like some other dangerous politician whom he is criticising currently.
Thanks for another superb tour-de-force.
But I fear that, as your correspondent clearly demonstrates we are faced with a truly monumental struggle to get the truth about both Yugoslavia and the Russia / Chechen conflict recognised
@Anonymous:This is the date when this great nation called Russia recognized Croatia – 17.2.1992.
At the time, Russia was anything but a great nation. It was a third-world like country, colonized and run by the USA and its Jewish oligarchs who did everything and everything Uncle Sam ordered to do. And when in 1993 a large segment of the population supported the Parliament, Eltsin crushed the revolt with tanks shooting in the middle of Moscow and all sort of “democratic militias” (mobsters, betar, etc.) killed hundreds of people during a 5 day long bloodbath.
Russia, as a country, disappeared in 1917 and reappeared, albeit with great changes, in 1999-2000. The period between 1991 and 1999 can only be compared with the utter chaos of February and November 1917 or, even more accurately, with the total chaos in Banderastan today.
May God forgive us the Croats for our sins toward Russia.
And may God forgive us Russians against our sins against all those whom we have wronged in the past, and also forgive the Serbs, and the Bosnian-Muslims, and the Chechens, and Kosovo Albanians and all of us for turning against each other instead of turning against the Devil his shaitans on earth.
The Saker
thank you for bringing up the elephant in the room: Camp Bondsteel, and why it was was so important to vilify the Serbs and intervene against them.
We cannot see through the lies and deceit until we recognise weber it started first: ex-Yugoslavia.
great job Saker!
@Zainab:
Dear Sister, peace to you and God’s mercy and blessings. Thank you for your kind words which always go to my heart. Please do not forget me in your prayers,
The Saker
@Wikispooks:we are faced with a truly monumental struggle to get the truth about both Yugoslavia and the Russia / Chechen conflict recognised
Yes, this is so, but we have to nonetheless. Not only to set the historical record strait, but primarily to unmask the Empire’s tactics and to avoid being duped the next time around which, I am sure, will happen many times again. So there is a wall of lies which needs to be smashed, one person at a time, but with time, we will, I am sure, have a critical mass who will question the official narrative and reconsider it all. After all, we are not trying to prove that the Serbs were innocent and pure heroes – God knows that they were not – but that the reality of these wars was much more complex than the primitive black/white version presented by the Empire’s corporate media.
I personally think that anybody with a modicum of critical thought will connect the dots between “rape as a weapon of war” in Bosnia with “Gaddafi distributing Viagra to his soldiers” in Libya. The Empire counts on us being stupid and with a 30 seconds attention span. Let’s prove it wrong ;-)
Kind regards,
The Saker
Dear Saker
If you don’t want, you need not publish this post. Saker, up to you.
There are many Croats who fight for the truth when Russia is in question.
Please look at this text in Croatian, here is the link too, the number of the post is 3139
Ma kakva Slavonija i Krajina i koji kurac više povlačite paralele koje nemaju veze.
Krim je dio Rusije od kako su istjerali Rusi Turke Osmanlije a Crnomorska Flota je tu stacionirana ni manje ni više nego 230 godina, a to je djelo kneza Potemkina.
Čak i boljševici koji su razbili Rusku imperiju na dijelove ucrtali su Krim unutar Ruske Federacije.
Za Sevastopolj su izginule stotine tisuća ruskih vojnika u raznim ratovima.
I sve je to dakle nevažno, a važno je da je jedan pijani kreten Kruscev jednog dana ustao na lijevu nogu i dobio na pamet ideju da pokloni Krim Ukrajini.
Bez referenduma, bez pitanja i potpuno na svoju ruku.
I njegova volja je teža nego volja milijuna građana Krima.
O hajde sve to bi i prošlo da nisu Amerikanci pokušali da uz pomoć ukrajinskih marioneta izbace iz Krima i Crnomorsku Flotu i da se oni tu uvale.
Jebeš povijst, jebeš žrtve kroz sve moguće bitke, jebeš ratove protiv Osmanlija, jebeš što tisuća Rusa izginulih za Sevastopolj u 2. svjetskom ratu, sve je to pizdin dim, važnija je volja volja jedne pijandure u trenucima Delirium Tremensa nego sve ostalo zajedno.
I onda nađeš nekoliko prodanih duša, izvršiš državni udar i onda uvaliiš lijepo tu Uncle Sam mornaricu, da oni lijepo hlade jaja na oblama Krima i Sevastopolja.
E pa ne može i po cijenu nuklearnoga rata i tu su Rusi u pravu. Apsolutno.
A Ukrajinci, odnosno njihovo vođstvo?
Pa kako su posijali tako će i žnjeti.
Rusija je 23 godina sa njima pokušavala dogovorom i sporazumima, ali su dobili nož u leđa. Izdaju bez presedana.
I zato se Rusi ne trebaju mnogo obazirati ni na kuknjave ni na prijetnje.
Saker said –
At the time, Russia was anything but a great nation. It was a third-world like country, colonized and run by the USA and its Jewish oligarchs who did everything and everything Uncle Sam ordered to do.
And because of it
Russia was even greater Nation because recognized Croatia before the great Hegemon USA
At the time, practically everybody bought that narrative
not for me, ’cause I know history :-)
dear saker,
great and heroic your information work , ’cause you’ve got to expect more and more stressful letters from people who do not know (and especially does not want to know ) history
so God bless you
Thank you Saker for this great blog and this commemorative piece.
greatings from Belgrade
dear Saker
I forgot to paste link for post 3139
please, could you insert it if you decide to publish it?
Thank you Saker for great blog and this commemorative piece.
For our Croatian friends one question: If Putin was in power, would he recognize Croatia and let ex-Yugoslavia gone in flames?
Economy of all exYu countries are just one digit % of what it was in Yu. I don’t think that people in any exYu country profited of its disintegration (just oligarchs)
greetings from Belgrade
16 000 of the 18 000 ukrainian soldiers that were in Crimea won’t leave the new republic and join the Russian Federation. Only 2000 soldiers are going back to Ukraine. 54 of the 67 warships of the Ukrainian fleet are joining the Russian Navy.
If Ukraine wants war with Russia, the governement has to remember that in the hour after the war declaration, at least half of its army will join the opposite side.
http://fr.ria.ru/defense/20140322/200786699.html
Većina bivše Ukrajinske vojske prelazi u redove Ruske vojske.
Hi Saker
Here is the link – sorry for the mess, please insert it where is mentioned post number 3139
http://www.forum.hr/showthread.php?t=819092&page=157
Regards, Croat
Saker,
One of the many things that are grossly overlooked with regards to the war is Bosnia is this:
Tens of Thousands of Bosnian Muslims fought alongside their Bosnian Serb brethren against the fascist regime in Sarajevo.
Anyone ever here about Cazinska Krajina AKA The Autonomous Republic of Western Bosnia?
Does the name Fikret Abdic ring a bell? How about Ibrahim Djedovic?
So for example, when Izetbegovic ordered his 5th Corps to attack Velika Kladusa, it was Bosnian Muslims killing Bosnian Muslims.
As one can clearly see from the example above, it doesn’t fit into the neat victimological categories established by the US, the media & their allies.
My Friend from Belgrade
There are many Serbs and Croats who are willing to betray own country for sake of career in NATO/EU positions, but also know that there are many Croats and Serbs who gravitate to Russia and the multipolar world order. So let’s put aside our differences between us and let’s give the support to Russia, because if or once Russia is deleted from the map, we all are nothing and nobody. Cheers.
Croat – Hrvat – Horvat
Off topic: VS, have you heard the transcript of the Tymoshenko call:
http://youtu.be/8OBEiIUmOpk
I am posting this here because it may interest your readers, even if this is not the most appropriate discussion to which it belongs.
Deutschland ist auch ein amerikanischer Vasall
Gregor Gysi addressing German Bundestag.
Then a new government was formed. Directly accepted by president Obama, also by the EU, also from Germany. Ms. Merkel! This government’s vice premier minister, the defence minister, the agricultural minister, the environmental minister, the Attorney General… are fascists! The head of the national security committee was co-founder of the fascist Swoboda party. Fascists have important positions and dominate, for example, the security sector. And never have fascists voluntarily given up power once they had conquered a part of it. At least Germany should have drawn the line here, especially because of our history. When Haider’s FPÖ joined the government in Austra, there were even contact barriers! And with the fascists in Ukraine we do nothing?! Swoboda has close contacts to the NPD and other nazi parties in Europe. The chairman of this party, Olek Tjahnybok, has stated the following. I am going to quote him now. You need to grasp this, what he has said literally: “Grab your weapons. Fight the Russian pigs, the Germans and the Jew swines and others pests”. End of quote. I repeat. This man has said “Grab your weapons. Fight the Russian pigs, the Germans and the Jew swines and others pests”. Attacks on jews and left-wingers are now common and to all this you say nothing? You talk with these Swoboda people? I think this is a scandal. I have to tell you this clearly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXLy0NGW9sM
Thank you Saker for this. It looks like Tymoshenko is trying to start Yugoslavia II along with the Banderstan colleagues:
http://rt.com/news/tymoshenko-calls-destroy-russia-917/
RT also has a film Why?
http://rt.com/shows/documentary/yugoslavia-bombing-nato-serbia-777/
As mentioned the other day – its about humanity – we must stop allowing them to manipulate and create hate.
Rgds,
Veritas
@Meezer:Anyone ever here about Cazinska Krajina AKA The Autonomous Republic of Western Bosnia? Does the name Fikret Abdic ring a bell? How about Ibrahim Djedovic? So for example, when Izetbegovic ordered his 5th Corps to attack Velika Kladusa, it was Bosnian Muslims killing Bosnian Muslims.
WOW! How is it that you know about these things? Amazing, I thought that everybody had forgotten about this. But yes, of course, I did follow Abdic’s struggle very closely and, man, what a missed opportunity (not by his fault, of course). He was located in one of the worst locations possible (Western Bosnia) and as soon as the US-commanded Croats launched the attack on the Krajinas his fate was sealed, of course. Then, of course, the Empire conveniently pinned accusations of atrocity on him and he was “forgotten” by history.
People like Abdic (or Eden Pastora) are a big pain in the collective rear of the Empire because they make a black/white story looks suddenly much more complicated. Ahmand and Ramzan Kadyrov are the success story here, but as a rule people like Abdic (or Pastora) end up literally erased from the official history which always presents the Empire’s wars as neat and simple, with no nuances or shades of grey.
Frankly, I never mention Abdic because I am concerned that if I write that a Muslim was fighting side by side with Serbs against the US-controlled regime in Sarajovo I will get a hysterical reaction from most readers. This is a “delicate” subject to say the least, but I tried to lift the veil, slowly and step by step. But to have a reader mention Abdic in the comments section *really* made my day and gives me hope for the future!!
Anyway, thank you VERY much for mentioning the name of a person who most definitely deserves much more recognition than what he got.
The Saker
Another great post form you. I gained a lot of insight and am reminded that i know basically nothing still.
I enjoyed reading it so much and can’t but emphasize enough the point you make at the end “the Empire has had a stunning success in using Muslims literally as cannon fodder to fight against its enemies”. It’s as true today as it was true so often before, not just with Muslims but with members of so many religios groups.
Why? Because religious assemblies of people are susceptive to be used in the name of their religion, of course against those of another religion. And here again i try to make a point to look at it from a non-religious view. Even you, while trying to be objective and being a very good analyst, cannot, it seems, escape the boundaries of your religion. “The real enemy of Islam is exactly the same as the real enemy of Christianity: the AngloZionist Empire.” This sentence, imho, makes it look like it’s a war of religions or that religion is even what this is all about. I state my opinion: It is not. EVERY of the major religions are being used to further other goals and EVERYONE who is acting led by a religuous motive is in danger of being used, while the religion itself is just used for pretexts and to align the groups of people to act like the ‘leaders’ want them.
So what is it all about in this world? Is it maybe all about what nature is all about? Maybe it’s just a cyclical fight of survival? The tree could not care less if the grass in its shadow sufers the same as newly introduced mammals care about New Zealands faua (or European humans cared about the fate of Ozeania humans, original inhabitants of america and so on).
Another way to look at it, play a Real Time Strategy game, such as the old but fun Dune 2, Warcraft and Starcraft. That is what happens in this world. There you win of you destroy your enemy using a military backed economy.
Going all like ‘God bless you’ and pat the members of other religions on the shoulders may be a way to ease religious tensions and may lead to a warm and fuzzy feeling to everyone involved. Yet, that is only a short and local relief. To really be able to act in ones own interest of a group of people, the people must overcome the tight grip religions have on them. Not to say abandon them, but free themself from the string they hang on being played and steered with.
-yt.
mr Saker! You brought upon yourself to educate the west about Eurasian history!
Very interesting topics and indeed: as long as one is not confronted with conflicting information, one cannot become aware of being deluded by propaganda!
The customs union: Russia, Belarus, Kazachstan and later perhaps S and E Ukraine…
We in the West only hear about these countries as brutal dictatorships.
You described them as ´liberated´.
I would like to hear more!
The coming years, I would not be surprised if the S EU would exit and associate with the BRICS.
Hi Saker,
very interesting this post, especially the correspondence.
I will not speak about Bosnia or Serbia or any of that. I’ll leave it to people that actually know somehting about it, like you and others here. It is however, sufficient to say, that I remember my father grumbling against the Americans when we were seeing all that on tv.
It’s really funny, thinking about it now, and considering someone talking about cognitive dissonance re. my nickname awhile ago – as I’ve basically grown in a sort of cognitive dissonance – everything I was told outside home would be questioned there. Not directly, as my father never actually discussed these things with me, but, essentially, everything I heard praised outside, I’d hear criticised inside.
Anyway, what I really want to talk about is – again, I know – semantics. Specifically your (not just yours of course) choice of adjectives.
In your exchanges we see the words fascist, nazis, etc – thrown back and forth to describe, well, enemies essentially.
You say A are nazis. The other guy says B are fascists. And then vice-versa, ad eternum.
These words have lost their original political meaning long ago. Men a lot bigger and wiser than me have said it – more on that at the end. However, they have not lost an element of their original meaning: enemy of jews. Or better yet, enemy of the judeo-ideology (anglo-zionism as you call it).
This meaning they have not lost. And to that meaning another as been ascribed – actually (in my opinion) fabricated: evil. The point is obvious: to force the notion that being an enemy of judeo-ideology is evil.
I hope you now see the issue here. I also want to draw your attention to the fact that it is rather confusing for people trying to discern the truth around them. It’s quite a challenge to identify your enemy when you are constantly indoctrinated that the alleged worse evil ever to have existed on this earth is also an enemy of your enemy, including by the one’s who are trying to tell you – and justly so – who your enemy is.
Anyway, I’m sure we’ll have more opportunities to discuss this when your promised post about NSism comes. I just fell compelled to write because this semantic issue really is glaring in this correspondence of yours. It’s actually funny. Nothing would change, from a semantic point of view, if you replaced “nazi” or “fascist” with “evil” or “bad” or “ill-intentioned”. That’s a fact.
About this there’s a very interesting essay by George Orwell which explains it a lot better than I ever could, check it out:
https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm
Saker, thank you for trying to tell the truth about anti-Serbian hysteria in the 90s in Western world. I do not agree completely with your description of Milosevic, but you are right when you say that he basically betrayed the Serbs on many occasions.
Now I will just quote a Croatian person writing before me:
“So let’s put aside our differences between us and let’s give the support to Russia, because if or once Russia is deleted from the map, we all are nothing and nobody. Cheers.
Croat – Hrvat – Horvat “
Very nice comment, Hrvat! Btw, I completely disagree with Saker in one point: he sais that pan-Slavism is “silly” and “dead for 200 years”. That is very, very wrong, Saker! You sound on that issue like British wikipedia, who proclaimed “pan-Slavism is dead”. I can assure you it is neither dead nor silly!
Greetings to all normal Croats on this site. I feel better when I read such comments, because wars in ex-Yugoslavia made it almost impossible to communicate normally with our Slavic brothers.
Cheers! Pozdrav svima!
please, what is the title of this “best book on Wahhabism”?
@Anonymous:I completely disagree with Saker in one point: he sais that pan-Slavism is “silly” and “dead for 200 years”. That is very, very wrong, Saker!
Respectfully, I disagree. Pan-Slavism is based on ethnicity – by definition – and I reject all forms of ethnicity based politics. There is only one very small and short step from ethnic politics to racialism to racism and I categorically refuse to use any ethnicity based categories. Besides, who is closer to me: a Pole who supports a Ukrainian Bandrists, or my (Muslim) Kazhakh friend? Russian have always been far closer to our Asian brothers than to other Slav nations with the sole exception of Serbia. Look at Bulgaria – a NATO base. Look at Poland – a hate-filled NATO base. And then look at Kazakhstan whose President proposed a Eurasian Union as early as 1991 (20 years or so before Putin!!). Pan-Slavism has dragged into too many wars in which Russia lost a lot and gained nothing. Serbia is THE big exception here, but the rest of our so-called “Slavic brothers” are the kind of “brothers” who make you realize that you don’t need enemies. As I have read recently, “Russia has suffered far less from her enemies, than from betrayals”. That is true. The next time the Ottomans decide to kick some Bulgarian ass – let the Bulgarians call in NATO for help.
No, pan-Slavism is yet another local franchise of the West European 19th century ideology of nationalism, the very same one which produced such abominations as National-Socialism and Zionism.
I personally hope for the day – which I am sure shall come – when ALL nationalisms die, along with ethnic politics and any sub-variants or racialism and racism. All that toxic nonsense was invented after the French Revolution and mankind lived without this for many centuries. Hopefully, we can ditch it again.
Cheers and kind regards,
The Saker
During the civil war in Yugoslavia I remember watching a clip on the BBC where a Muslim policeman in Sarajevo was showing a pistol, He said, i remember, that he had just one magazine left and that the last bullet was for himself. I remember feeling angry then, I’d probably feel indifferent now. I was angry and wondering what all the other Muslims were doing. If that man was a propaganda tool, I guess he was having the desired effect.
In the 1994 almanac of Military Technology there was one and a half page listed as equipment of the Serbs, a half page listing of Croat weaponry, and one line for Bosnian Muslims “small arms”. That made me angry too.
I read in a few places of Saudi involvement in Bosnia and frowned on it, knowing where that would lead. I read of Iranian efforts and felt hope. I guess i was a lot more naive back then.
I am sure most mainstream Muslim leaders see Putin as a good man, a man on their side, and an ally. But how long will this ally last. What was there before Putin, how sudden was the change when he was gone in between (S300s for Iran) and where things will go after he has gone.
Hizbollah will fight till it has Iran, to some extent Bashar, and to a lesser extent Putin backing it. But it is standing against a Tsunami. The Saudi brand of Islam is spreading like an epidemic. Even locally Sunni Muslims who used to visit shrines are turning away. Some of my employees are now Wahhabi. It’s not changed them in any way, but they are not religious or politically conscious. When the Taliban had killed the Iranian diplomats in Afghanistan, I pointed out to my local shop keeper, who was a Taliban fan and deeply religious, that they were killing Muslims. His response was they had killed Shias.
For now till there is no alternative or future mapped out, I do not want to see sudden changes. Yes the solution would be to get rid of Wahhabism, Zionism, American imperialism. But what happens if the boat is rocked too fast. And I don’t see this struggle ending or the “good” side winning. Yes right now there is a groundswell of frustration with the ruling elite, but I feel this will pass. They will point this anger in some other direction. They will manipulate the masses.
For now the Shias have an ally in Putin, but tomorrow they will be alone once again. The 1% will try next to change the ruling class in Russia. They can’t fight the bear head on. You see it in Obama’s mannerism with Putin. In the beginning you saw him happy and welcoming of Putin. Now he just wants to be over and done with when they are together. It’s like here is guy I can work with. We can have a unipolar world. And Putins like I’m already popular buddy, I don’t need no approval ratings.
Mindfriedo
Cont…
I’ll try and sum up rather than rambling on:
1. i have to disbelieve a lot of things I saw and read to agree completely with what you say regarding Serbia. I’d rather agree with you entirely, cause this matters to you, and I don’t doubt that it was something orchestrated, but I would still sympathise with that guy with the single magazine.
2. In the short term the solution is get rid of the ruling elite in Saudi Arabia, the Taliban, and the Zionist. But any change would have consequences. High fuel prices, economic collapse and more suffering. Not to mention the struggle the Shias in these areas will have to bear. Like they are facing in Bahrain today. And any rule by any Shia will eventually turn oppressive for its opponents.
3. This struggle will not end. A Shia belief, like most Messianic beliefs, is that things will worsen before the end time. That every person will get the opportunity to rule and to fail, till Gods kingdom.
The only hope I sometimes feel is when I saw hizbollah winning in 2006. I believed then that Israel had won from what I saw on TV. Even though i was watching television in Iran in those days. there were posters of Nasrallah being distributed on Inqalab square but not in Vanak. i think he was more popular with the arab Sunnis then, than he was with most iranian Shias. Iranians may disagree but this i saw on the streets of tehran.
I realised later that the Hizballah had prevailed. But how long can they keep fighting on so many fronts, how long will their leaders remain incorruptible, how long will Iran have their back, and most importantly how long will God grant them victory.
Thank you Saker may God continue to guide you.
Mindfriedo
@Mindfriedo:In the 1994 almanac of Military Technology there was one and a half page listed as equipment of the Serbs, a half page listing of Croat weaponry, and one line for Bosnian Muslims “small arms”.
But there is a lot of truth to that. The Serbs did have access to many military depots, so they had much more tanks and artillery than the Bosnian-Muslims. As for the Bosnian-Muslims they have far more men under arms, so the Serbs could easily attack and gain terrain, but they could not hold it, the superior numbers of Bosnian Muslism could easily envelop the Serbian force and re-take the “gained” terrain. Also, Bosnia is what is called in military terms “mix-terrain”: lots of mountains, hills, rivers, fast streams, etc. This is very bad terrain for armor and much better for infantry (this is why Switzerland, with a similar terrain, had roughly 60% infantry in its military). Of course, the Empire’s press said that the Serbs were using heavy guns against “civilians”, but they did not explain *why* the Serbs were so dependent on artillery and tanks: because their numbers were much smaller.
As for the Croats, they were the smallest group to begin with, and they were only interested in some areas of Bosnia, but they could always count on the full support of the Croatian military and their firepower (which, in turn, was supported by NATO).
So while it is true that the western sources did lie a lot about this war, it is also true that the Serbs did have MUCH more firepower than the Bosnian-Muslims.
One more thing: the Bosnian-Muslims were mostly city folks. The Bosnian-Serbs were mostly rural. Thus they had an advantage in the rural areas and they succeeded in blockading many mostly Bosnian-Muslims cities. Hence the dramatic battles around Gorazde, Tuzla, Sarajevo and, of course, Srebrenica.
The way this war went was pre-ordained by geography and demographics, really.
Cheers,
The Saker
Today’s post by The Saker is now to be seen (with typos corrected) at
The Empire’s war Against the Serbian Nation:
Lessons for the Resistance
Hi all, a bit off topic howewer interesting:http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/24/dark-questions-about-a-deadly-fbi-interrogation-in-orlando/
Saker, that was a terrific post. And you’re right – we should never forget the wars in Yugoslavia because that’s where it all really started – empire under the guise of humanitarian intervention.
Whenever I attempt to de-demonise Putin, whoever I’m debating with says ‘ah, well, what about Chechyna?’ I don’t really know enough about this – for a long time I followed the western narrative of gallant little Chechyna crushed by the Russian bear and it’s taken a while to understand that wasn’t the case. Do you know of anything I could read that would give a much informative picture of what actually went on?
@Fern: Do you know of anything I could read that would give a much informative picture of what actually went on?
No, alas, I don’t. At least not in English. There has been a lot of very good research made about that, but it’s all in Russian. The problem is that this is a complex war and that the situation on the ground changed dramatically. To really get a grip on this war, you need to understand what the break-up of the Soviet Union did to Russia, what it did to Chechnia, but you need to look deeper in the Russian war to conquer the Caucasus, and to the historical Chechen resistance to this invasion, then you also need to look into why the Soviet regime especially hated the Chechen people and how they were horrible oppressed and massively displaced by Stalin, you need to look into the corruption of the Eltsin regime and why the 2st Chechen war really began there. As for the 2nd Chechen war, it was completely different from the first one, with very different people in command and fought in totally different circumstances. Oh, and then, you need also look into the amazing case of Akhmad Kadyrov who fought against Russia in the first war and for Russia in the second one, and into the miracle his son Ramzan has achieved since the end of the 2nd war. It is all hugely complicated and I don’t know of any source in English which would take the time to lay out all these elements before analyzing these wars.
Maybe some other reader can recommend a good book?
I will try to keep your request in mind and if I find something, I will let you know.
Sorry about that and kind regards.
The Saker
A mandatory documentary about the end of Yugoslavia and the catastrophe that followed.
From the Serbian “Michael Moore”, The weight of Chains…
http://youtu.be/waEYQ46gH08
Thanks very much, Saker, for providing those two emails to peruse and your commentary upon them. A very revealing fact was uncovered and presented my Fischer in his Germany’s Aims in the First World War: The Kaiser regarding the coming war as a racial “struggle between Teuton and Slav,” yet also lumped in the French–“Now comes Chapter 3 [of the Great Migrations], the Germanic peoples’ fight for their existence against Russo-Gallia. No further conference can smooth this over, for it is not a question of high politics, but one of race … for what is at issue is whether the Germanic race is to be or not to be in Europe” (emphasis in original) as revealed in his marginal comments on reports from the Ambassadors Conference held during December 1912 in London (pgs 31-34). His thoughts were shared by many within the German government. And an examination of that period’s propaganda reveals the use of racial iconography on a mass scale.
There’s a lot of crap filling the space between a great many people’s ears that needs to be unlearned, which is hard enough to do when one has the time and resources. Your contributions to that endeavor are most welcomed.
It was the way many of what I had thought were leftwing/progressive people and organisations covered the Yugoslav break-up that clued me into how deeply the left in the west had been infiltrated by the right and corporate/fascist interests.
вот так
Fern, et al: I was writing a book about Chechnya hoping to get it published before things there went wrong. What prompted me was my research into the Caucuses and its myriad peoples I stumbled upon as I was digging into Russian history. Fortunately, I had the use of the UH Manoa library system and time to read the seldom read books published in English on the region prior to WW1. IMO, that’s the best place to begin, although you must wade through the pro-British bias; so, you’ll need to have access to a top-notch university library. Alas, the war destroyed my literary attempt as a raft of rushed propaganda appeared to derail my effort.
I haven’t looked, but wikileaks may have published some dispatches related to the conflict that could be revelatory.
So, now we have the “Hague Declaration” continuing the West’s attempt at the Big Lie:
“This clear violation of international law is a serious challenge to the rule of law around the world and should be a concern for all nations. In response to Russia’s violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and to demonstrate our determination to respond to these illegal actions, individually and collectively we have imposed a variety of sanctions against Russia and those individuals and entities responsible. We remain ready to intensify actions including coordinated sectoral sanctions that will have an increasingly significant impact on the Russian economy, if Russia continues to escalate this situation.”
Again, a complete opposite of the True situation agreed to by the heads of the G-7; They ALL agree on the Big Lie together. The G-7 is now an Outlaw Institution if it wasn’t before. Clearly, no G-7 government can be considered credible any longer.
Saker, there was one angle with the Anglo-Zionist game of “lets you and him fight” that I believe you missed. Please hear me out on this, because it’s important!
I can only speak for the US because that’s where I live, but I suspect it’s true in some parts of Europe, as well (Scandinavia, in particular). That is that the both the Jewish left and Zionist right use Muslim immigration to get the target Christian population to see how nasty Israel’s enemies are. Of course, the real enemy of International Jewry is (as Brother Nathaneal says) western Christendom, but their ostensible enemy is Islam. Ship in the most barbaric and backward Muslims into a western Christian culture and when some of those Muslims run wild, as they have in Minnesota (skyrocketing crime rate) or Sweden (from no crime to it not even being safe for a girl to walk alone at night) and you generate sympathy for the “poor Jews” and Israel. This kind of socially engineered mass immigration doesn’t even require a false flag because it destroys once peaceful and homogenous communities . I can tell you, in the US, the mostly Jewish ACLU advocates for Muslim rights to the detriment of Christian culture, while at the same time they also attack the religious expression of Christians. How do you suppose the average western Christian reacts to, say, special Muslim foot baths being installed, at the University of Michigan, while Christian expression, say, at Christmas time, is attacked? Or when we hear about “honor killings” or a Swedish girl is raped by a Muslim because he thinks western girls are all whores for the taking? I’ll tell you. People think “Man, those Jews are right! No wonder they hate Muslims. Now, we, too, are under attack from Islam. Support Israel! Their enemy is OUR enemy!” This is especially true in the US where we don’t share a land mass with Muslims and their being here is unnatural and not welcome. Not because it’s natural for Americans to dislike foreign cultures but because the cultures are so vastly different that they do not belong together.
So, who is responsible for these POLICIES of mass immigration and forced multiculturalism? Not Muslims! It’s two factions: internationalists who, like the Bolsheviks were, are dominated by leftist Jews and, Zionists who want to generate sympathy for Israel by putting the worst of their enemies in our midst. Please look at this one minute video for an example of what I mean:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFE0qAiofMQ
Have we not seen European and British nationalists align themselves (even controlled by) Zionists? And, why does that happen? As a backlash against multiculturalism and the importation of Muslims. Oh, the irony that these groups should align with the very people who are behind multiculturalism and mass immigration!
So, there is another example of “lets you and him fight” and “let my enemy become your enemy so you will keep supporting Israel while we destroy your western Christian civilization which is our REAL enemy”.
Yours truly,
Michigan
I believe that a vivid example of the forces and tactics and strategies at work in the world today is Oded Yinon’s ‘Zionist Plan for the Middle East’, published in Kivumin magazine (a Zionist publication) in 1982. It’s basic agenda was reiterated by, inter alia Netan-yahoo et al in ‘A Clean Break’, another Zionazi planning document, and subsequently by the likes of US Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters with his plan for a ‘New Middle East’.
All these plans, which descend from earlier Zionist plottings, envisage the countries of the Islamic Middle East and North Africa, split up into powerless statelets, by the deliberate fomenting of civil war along tribal, sectarian and ethnic lines, the better for Eretz Yisrael, ‘from the Nile to the Euphrates’ to be realised. Iraq was nominated as the first target, to be broken into three, and that project is still proceeding, with the Kurds, long cultivated by Mossad, independent in all but name. Syria was to be broken into four, a project still evolving, but in danger of being defeated, hence the rising intervention of Israel on the side of the jihadist cannibals.
It goes without saying that it is a supremely wicked policy, based on infinite contempt for the lives of the Gentile ‘two-legged animals’ who must die in the process. It is a project of the clerico-fascist Zionazi elite, and, undoubtedly, a good fraction of Israeli Jews and more within the diaspora would reject it, if it were allowed to be discussed. It is, of course, ultimately self-destructive for Israel, too, simply because such genocidal machinations would cause such revulsion that Israel would lose the tatters of its already shredded global ‘respectability’ and ‘legitimacy’. Unfortunately, as elsewhere in the West, the morally insane far Right, in league with religious fundamentalist hate-mongers of the direst kind, have risen, like scum, to the top of the Israeli military-political hierarchy, and no atrocity is beyond this crew. We all have to fear the ‘Samson Option’ of Likudnik xenophobes with their Masada Complex and hundreds of thermo-nuclear weapons.
Imagine my delight at your mention of Comandante Cero, Eden Pastora. I had not heard that name, or anything about the famous La Penca assassination attempt in at least ten years. That was the beginning of my political education but I have never forgotten Pastora’s extraordinary courage. Such men are few and far between.
I take your anonymous academic to be Mr Algar who wrote an excellent book on Wahhabism about the time you mentioned, early 2000s and who, in talks I have seen on youtube, seems to have accepted the ‘put upon Muslims’ propaganda model hook line and sinker. Also your email stated “… A person with your phenomenal culture…”, which is almost surely a acknowledgement of Algar’s Iranian training. Not to out Prof. Algar, but he is symptomatic of the blinkered approach that most muslim scholars, I can only except Imran Hosein, have to the current upheavals. And to gauge the muslim reception to imran hosein I would suggest you read the youtube comments to his lectures – they range from vilest vulgarity to the most banal irrelevance. I am reminded of a concept in the law known as ‘willful blindness’. I am not hopeful!
Finally, you mentioned Michel Collon, I have come across his site on a number of occasions only to be frustrated by the fact that I speak neither spanish nor french and I am unable to read his work. If there are sites that translate his work into English I would certainly appreciate a heads up.
Repost from 2 days ago: first my apologies, but the topic here being more broadly the Resistance, I believe it’s ok to post this question/reflection here:
Hi Saker,
Again many thanks for your amazing blog. Indeed I agree with you that Russia (Putin) is THE resistance pole against the Turbocapitalist Empire (I don’t like using anglozionist, for I believe deeply the REAL problem is modern globalized capitalism as Marx correctly predicted long ago) and Russia has been identified as the n°1 enemy to remove by this empire like Germany was in the 30s (I stress that I do not intend to launch a debate on WW2 and its causes as you righlty asked in a post before).
And here I wonder if Russia has a chance to win in the coming confrontation (not necesarily only military)? Russia’s economy still hugely depends on raw materials (Soviet inheritance especially from the Brezhnev era), 75-80% of Russia’s export structure is mostly minerals and other raw materials (Mikhail Khazin).
Russia’s military industry is truly world class, its aviation industry is getting back on its feet fast, same for its space program (Glonass, Vostochny cosmodrome, coming probes to the Moon, Mars..) many technologies previously lost have been/are being restored and that’s great news, more and more science and engineering students are enrolling to STEM universities & colleges, but what worries me is that Russia’s productive industry is still far (in the non-defense sector) from Germany’s industry, let alone the whole COMBINED West (even if declining on all fronts). How can structurally Russia compete against them (US, EU, Japan and their clients)? You are certainly aware that what counts ultimately is ones military might which directly depends from one’s industrial might. Russia’s dependency on raw materials makes the country very fragile I believe, and Russia has some critical dependencies on western hi-tech firms especially in stuff like machine-tooling (CRITICAL). Does Russia realistically have chance? I don’t count China, India, BRICS as more than tactical allies in the long term, they all have their own interests and won’t compromise them to resist the Empire (moreover for them submission isn’t such a problem after all if you analyse the long history of these peoples on this subject I recommend the philosopher Francis Cousin on Soral’s website you are fluent in French I believe). The question is huge I know. Thank you for yours (or anyone’s) answer.
Observer
Thanks for this really great post Saker. And on the same subject (ex-Yugoslavia), my humble suggestion: Fool’s Crusade, Yugoslavia, NATO and Western Delusions, by Diana Johnstone.
A must read book.
@Anonymous: If there are sites that translate his work into English I would certainly appreciate a heads up.
I am not sure about sites, but two of his most recent books are available in English:
http://www.amazon.com/Liars-Poker-Powers-Yugoslavia-Future/dp/0965691667/
http://www.amazon.com/Media-Conquest-Kosovo-Michel-Collon/dp/0970919816/
His early book MediaMensonges (trans. “MediaLies”) has not been republished since 1994, at least as far as I know.
Keep in mind that if Collon was one of the earliest ones, he is not necessarily the best one, and he also has some “blind spots”. I am sure that there are excellent books available in English. I would begin by looking into memoirs of ex-UNPROFOR people. Also, David Owen wrote I book I have not read, but which might be interesting:
http://www.amazon.com/Balkan-Odyssey-Harvest-Book-David/dp/0156005212
Another book I have not read is the one by Parenti (whom I like a lot):
http://www.amazon.com/To-Kill-Nation-Attack-Yugoslavia/dp/1859843662/
Also see this by Diana Johnsetone:
http://www.amazon.com/Fools-Crusade-Yugoslavia-Western-Delusions/dp/158367084X/
I am hopeful that some other commentators will also help me point you in a good direction.
Kind regards,
The Saker
PS: I apologize but I am sure that you will understand that I can neither deny nor confirm your other comments other than saying that your deductive thinking is excellent ;-) Besides, let’s not dwell on personalities and stick to the issues, ok? Cheers!
@Panslavism
More often than not Panslavism is used as a code name for Russian expansionism, imperialism, you name it.
But the very origins of Panslavism are of Catholic inspiration. Its first proponent was a Croat, Juraj Križanić (1618-1683). The language he created and used in his writing (his “Common Slavonic Language”) was a mixture of several Slavic languages and was devised to serve as a symbol of and even to promote Slavic unity.
“Križanić had a strong desire to travel to Moscow with the ambitious goal of uniting the Roman Catholic and Russian Orthodox churches” (Wiki). His efforts were not to much appreciated by the Tsar who send him to cool down his head breathing the cool air of Siberia for 15 years. His works, which also include writings on music and economics, were re-discovered and printed in the mid-19th century.
Even later on, the first Pan-Slavic convention which was held in Prague on June 2 through 16, 1848 was specifically both anti-Austrian and anti-Russian.
WizOz
@WizOz: More often than not Panslavism is used as a code name for Russian expansionism, imperialism, you name it.
Absolutely true. Thanks about the fascinating information about Križanić, I had no idea.
But yes, pan-Slavism is the kind of ideology which got Russia into wars it had no business being involved in.
I have no more use for Russian imperialism than for any other imperialism. They are all equally abhorrent to me.
Thanks a lot for the very interesting info, kind regards,
The Saker
@Russian imperialism,
For sure the theme is a very complex one. But is this regard also the Western influence played a great role. More about Krizanic:
“A key component of Križanić’s theories concerning necessary reforms for the Russian state were his “Five Principles of Power.” His five principles were: Full autocracy (essentially absolute monarchy), closed borders, compulsory labor or a ban on idleness, government monopoly of foreign trade, and ideological conformity. Križanić argued that Russia would be strengthened if immigration were tightly restricted and if native Russians were prohibited from leaving the country without justification…. Many of the reforms he recommended were in fact carried out by Peter the Great, although there is no concrete evidence of Križanić’s direct influence in his doing so” (Wiki)
Again there is much to be discussed, e.g. the idea of The Third Rome.
WizOz
Dear Saker
‘The next time the Ottomans decide to kick some Bulgarian ass – let the Bulgarians call in NATO for help..
That is not very kind of you nor it is the fruit of profound analysis of the situation in Bulgaria (both politically and historically). It is a simplistic generalization which I did not expect from you – to mistake government for people. I suggest you visit Bulgaria and see by yourself the numerous monuments dedicated to Diado Ivan’s glory (Shipka, Pleven, etc.)
Source: I am Bulgarian
FWIW, I found the Parenti book worthwhile. However, the only books I’ve read on the subject are his, Johnstone’s (which is the one that impressed me most), and a brief one by Chomsky. I think that, for Americans especially, it is important to go back and take a second look at what the U.S. did in the Balkans. It is still referred back to as a model of a successful, justified humanitarian intervention; and the more clueless individuals in the Democratic party particularly need to understand, once again, what can happen under a Democratic president. I know it should be obvious that atrocities can occur under Democratic presidents, but many of my fellow Democrats (I’m registered as one but don’t vote party line, and doubt my own common sense for even taking our elections at all seriously) don’t seem to have learned this lesson.
@anonymous: I was not making a deep analysis of the wars in Bulgaria, but only expressing my personal deep disappointment with the fact that Bulgaria, a country which my family helped freeing from the Ottoman rule would join NATO. I am, of course, grateful for the monuments to Diado Ivan, but I would never want to shed a single drop of Russian blood for that kind of “brothers”. Let’s be good friends, but do not expect us to die for you the next time around. Let’s see how NATO does that. The Saker
(clarification)… Truth is, the bulgarian society after 1878 has been divided in Russophiles and Russophobes (even the parties in the Parliament were divided by this principle), and there is a historical reason for this – Diado Ivan has been viewed at the same time as the liberator and the occupier (see The Treaty of Berlin, the final act of the Congress of Berlin (13 June – 13 July 1878), by which the United Kingdom, Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, Italy, Russia and the Ottoman Empire under Sultan Abdul Hamid II revised the Treaty of San Stefano signed on 3 March the same year.The most important task of the Congress was to decide the fate of the Principality of Bulgaria established in the Treaty of San Stefano, even though Bulgaria itself was excluded from participation in the talks at Russian insistence).
Regards,
The same Bulgarian (Boris)
Saker,
‘…but only expressing my personal deep disappointment with the fact that Bulgaria, a country which my family helped freeing from the Ottoman rule would join NATO.’ – It is only fair, I am with you on this. And many others, believe me.
Boris (married to a Russian woman)
RT: Muzychko dead.
When we talk about Serbian weapons, we have to consider few facts. Some analysts say that Yugoslav peoples army (JNA) was forth army in the world during the 80’s. Yugoslavia produced tanks, airplanes, submarines… (Yugoslav T84 MBT beat Abrams in desert rally after the first Iraqi war in 1991 ).
By political decision certain percent of its members had to be from all nationalities of former Yu. It was true for higher echelon of the army (majors and up), but bulk of the army was Serbs. Majority of the army numbers was recruits from all over of Yugoslavia. When this army becomes aggressor in its own country over night, these recruits become first victims of now independent states. Most of Slovenian and Croat officers deserted army and left recruits and lower officers to fight paramilitary forces (we have to remember ones that stay loyal to their country and their army like general Marian Čad).
We have huge, good equipped army that is withdrawing under the fire from now independent states. Most of its assets (tanks, planes, artillery…) was saved and withdrawn to republics that are still part of Yugoslavia.
On the other hand, weapons for newly formed states has to be smuggled in (in that period Yugoslavia still exist), so majority of this weapons are small fire arms, portable rocket launchers and small caliber artillery.
Talking about wars in Balkans in previous century, there is the fact that most people disregards:
All Bosnian Muslims born before 1974 knows who they are by nationality (it was written in their birth certificate). They are Serbs.
Most Croats (except 6 or 7 families) are Serbs (after 7 years of research, Croat scientists comes to conclusion that genetically ancestors of Croats are Serbs from X century – so Croats are more “pure” Serbs that Serbs themselves ).
So, we have one nation divided by three religions, and whenever somebody wants war in Europe, he knows what card to play. That’s the tragedy.
Saker you mentioned that Muslim and Serbs fought together in west Bosnia. At the same time Croats and Serbs were fighting together around Sarajevo (Croats were dressed in Serbian uniforms). And that is the “grey” story.
@the Empire has had a stunning success in using Muslims literally as cannon fodder to fight against its enemies
It is sadly true. But we would make a big mistake if we believe that the success was not due to the fact that they found willing listeners. The savagery displayed by the jihadists everywhere is not just a “distorted view of the Koran” imposed by some sectarians. It is sadly imposed by the very Koran as obligations of any good Muslim.
Have a look at what happens right now in Syria:
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/
“A jihadi group occupying the Syrian town of Raqqa recently gave Christian minorities living there three choices: 1) convert to Islam, 2) remain Christian but pay tribute and accept third-class subject status, or 3) die by the sword.
According to the BBC, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria issued a directive citing the Islamic concept of “dhimma”, [which] requires Christians in the city to pay tax of around half an ounce (14g) of pure gold in exchange for their safety. It says Christians must not make renovations to churches, display crosses or other religious symbols outside churches, ring church bells or pray in public. Christians must not carry arms, and must follow other rules imposed by ISIS (also known as ISIL) on their daily lives. The statement said the group had met Christian representatives and offered them three choices—they could convert to Islam, accept ISIS’ conditions, or reject their control and risk being killed. “If they reject, they are subject to being legitimate targets, and nothing will remain between them and ISIS other than the sword,” the statement said.
Whereas Koran 9:29 provides divine sanction to fight the “People of the Book” (namely, Christians and Jews) “until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued,” the lesser known Conditions of Omar (also known as the Pact of Omar) lays out in detail how they are to feel themselves subdued.
Far from being merely a historical or theoretical text, the Conditions are very much on the minds of some Muslims. Aside from the new reports that jihadis are enforcing the Conditions—and to a tee—on the Christians of Raqqa, Syria, consider the following words of Saudi Sheikh Marzouk Salem al-Ghamdi, spoken once during a Friday mosque sermon:
‘If the infidels live among the Muslims, in accordance with the conditions set out by the Prophet—there is nothing wrong with it provided they pay Jizya to the Islamic treasury. Other conditions are . . . that they do not renovate a church or a monastery, do not rebuild ones that were destroyed, that they feed for three days any Muslim who passes by their homes . . . that they rise when a Muslim wishes to sit, that they do not imitate Muslims in dress and speech, nor ride horses, nor own swords, nor arm themselves with any kind of weapon; that they do not sell wine, do not show the cross, do not ring church bells, do not raise their voices during prayer, that they shave their hair in front so as to make them easily identifiable, do not incite anyone against the Muslims, and do not strike a Muslim. . . . If they violate these conditions, they have no protection’.
WizOz
I forgot to mention that Nato’s War (mostly written as the event unfolded) has a few facts (and links) relevant to this post by The Saker.
I will have to take issue with some of the posts on what the jizya means. The tax was to excuse non-Muslims from serving in any Muslim army. The Saudi sheik represents a Wahhabi brand of extremism, and the Qur’an quotes were, sadly, out of context. As a Muslim, I have to admit being fooled initially, but a Serbian friend showed me another view. Later, when I saw what was happening to the former Soviet republics, it was enough to make me question the whole Western hypothesis. I still seek the truth, because the Qur’an tells me to be just, even against myself. As the Prophet ruled for a Jew against a Muslim, because the Jew was correct and the Muslim was not, so we must still look to cleaning our own houses before throwing those stones. Be Just. That is the preferred action. As such, the Saudi sheik quoted is in violation. Enough said. I can only sympathize with Saker, as I have also had to cut from my college classes to keep up with all that is happening to Russia and Eastern Europe at the hands of the US and Western Europe.
The West was determined to destroy socialism in Yugoslavia and to that end the IMF and World Bank imposed their usual ‘austerities’ and Milosevich was originally ‘their man’. Then, when in became apparent thast the hard won balance of economic and social powers was under threat and people across the board lost a sense of security even in the tenure of their own land, not to mention pensions and public works (because all ‘must be privitized’ and another ‘reign of the oligarchs’ raised its head) the civil war started and finally degenerated into ethnic strife and all the horrors that result. Milosevich saw the errors of his ways but it was too late, ‘Vertical Strength’ was lost,all power devolved to local commanders and warlords.
http://www.brookings.edu/research/books/1995/balkantr
A lesson to be learned but, as we know “The West” never admits any mistakes or learns any lessons.
>> A lesson to be learned but, as we know, “The West” never admits any mistakes or learns any lessons >>
Dead right, johnshaplin. Western imbecility and depravity manifest themselves, inter alia, as a combination of uneducability and (a claim for) absolute infallibility. It’s like listening to a bunch of drunkards on a park bench. Indeed, what passes for “education” and “informed citizenry” in the West merely amounts to people being able to spout worthless propagandistic tripe learned by rote.
With regard to the NWO misadventures across the planet — among them Serbia, Syria, and the Ukraine — one could say that for all their delusions of grandeur, Westerners still possess a crass class consciousness. Instinctively at least, they know that in order to be able to keep trashing the planet wuth their wasteful, parasitic lifestyles, imperialist wars, coups, and all-out lawlessness are absolutely indispensable. “Right or wrong, it’s our class privileges”. Mind here, by the way, also how the average Western slob proudly resorts to the plural pronouns “we”, “us”, and “our”. Some “individualism”, ha!
Last but not least, given this parlously backward state of mind, things tend to become hilarious whenever the West faces an implacable adversary such as Russia under Putin. Being constantly outsmarted by what’s being perceived as inferior countries, peoples, and individuals is bound to bring about really funny tantrums.
NATO in the Balkans: Voices of Opposition
In my opinion the Old Testament is what’s wrong with Christianity and I wish that the early church had not accepted the entire mass of books as one. In my opinion from reading around in the Old Testament, it has nothing in common with the New Testament and therefore makes Christianity incoherent morally and theologically. And, I suspect, the Old Testament has also contributed negatively to Islam in that they have inherited, so to speak, some of its attitudes.
@WizOz
” It is sadly imposed by the very Koran as obligations of any good Muslim”
The Koran is a book of guidance. Some of its ayats are contextual. By taking an ayat and applying it literally you will be making the same mistake the Wahhabis make. There is the Hadees of Muhammad (sawa) of the two weighty things. They are the Koran and the Ahlulbayt. We refer to the second to interpret for us the first.
This is an incident from Imam Ali’s (a.s) life that teaches us how to treat Christians as subjects in an Islamic state (ie; as equals):
Once Imam Ali (A), on finding his (lost) armor in the possession of a Christian man, took him to court and stood with his opponent before Qazi Shurayh, his Chief Justice as a complainant and the Chief Justice wanted to give him a place of honour in the court and to treat him like a king or caliph. He reproached the judge for such a behaviour, saying that he was there as a plaintiff, and not as a king or caliph.
Imam Ali (A) informed the judge: “It is my armor. I neither sold, nor donated it”.
The judge asked the Christian man: “What do you have to say against what Amir al Momineen, Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) says?”
“It is mine”, said the Christian man. “Amir al Momineen, Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) is but a liar”.
The judge turned to Imam Ali (as), demanding that he should present his evidence proving that the armor was his. Imam Ali (as) smiled and said that he had no evidence. So, the judge issued his decision that the armor belonged to the Christian man.
Amir al Momineen, Imam Ali ibn Abu Talib (as) then cheerfully accepted the decision of the court against him. The effect of upholding the prestige of the Court of Justice, and his adherence to the principles of equality and equity were so impressive that the person, against whom he had filed the case, and had lost it, ran after him, kissed the hem of his garment, and said, “My master! Teach me Islam, I am a Christian and I want to be converted”.
“Why?” enquired Imam Ali (A), “Did anybody force you to do that?”
“No, my master”, he replied, “but your behaviour of treating even a non-Muslim subject as your equal, the prestige you have granted to justice and fair play, and your abstinence from use of power and authority made me feel that Islam is a great religion. You are a ruler and a caliph, you could have easily ordered me to be killed and my property looted, and nobody would have dared to ask reasons of your actions, but you took the case against me to the court, and cheerfully accepted the decision against you; I have never heard of such a ruler before you. Secondly, the thing that you claimed as yours is actually yours and not mine, but I know the persons who could provide proof of this are out of Kufa, therefore, I boldly said that it was mine, and not yours. That was a lie, and now I am ashamed to feel that I have lied against such an honourable person. You have heard me. Will you not allow me to enter the fold of Islam?”
The great Imam enquired, “Are you of your free-will entering our fold?”
“Yes”, he replied, “Under your regime, I have nothing to lose by remaining in my religion and no worldly benefit to gain by embracing Islam and by confessing my guilt and sin.”
mindfriedo
@WizOz
If you have the time please watch Lesley Hazelton on Ted Talks where she talks about Jihad as well. She references her work from her reading of Tabarri. If she were to base her work on the teachings of the AhlulBayt she would get a much kinder version.
regards
Mindfriedo
@literalism and Wahabis mistake
One would know that not only Wahabis fell into the mistake to read “out of context”.
When the Koran i.e. Mahomet himself declares that Jesus Christ is a mere prophet (lesser than him) and that those who affirm that Jesus is the Son of God are wrong and must “desist”, he does not teaches us how to treat Christians as subjects in an Islamic state (ie; as equals)but as enemies.
Quran, 5:73 They have certainly disbelieved who say, ” Allah is the third of three.” And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment.
Quran, 5:19, “In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: “Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every – one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things.”
Quran 5:75, “Christ the son of Mary was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how Allah doth make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away”.
And the affirmation that Jesus prophesied Muhammad, calling him Ahmad, or as the Islamic doctors contend, the Paracletos of the Gospels, The Comforter (who is in reality The Holy Spirit) is grotesque, but it was adduced to demonstrate that Christians could possibly believe it and converted. I do not want to give more examples because some Muslims will take umbrage at them and accuse us of reading “out of context”. But I cannot pass over the use that even today Muslims put the grotesque hoax of the so-called Gospel of Barnabas to support of the Islamic view of Jesus, and as an attempt to counter the canonical Gospels used by Christian missionaries.
WizOz
@WizOz
Since you mentioned that the Koran, i.e, God, was being oppressive, I wanted to point out that a literal application of an ayat leads to problems. Mohammad (sawa) has left guides, “12 princes”, to interpret the book of God.
Even after most Muslims did not choose to follow these injunctions, Muslims have been much more tolerant of Christianity and Judaism historically than the latter have been of Islam. If they would have followed the correct way, they would have been kinder still. Wahhabism has distorted Islam and harmed it from within.
Not trying to change anyone’s faith. “Hidayat” guidance comes from God.
Regarding the gospel of Barnabes, what a few people of a certain community do or say does not reflect on that faith or the community at large. Just like the crazy pastor burning Qurans in America does not reflect on Christianity or the Danish cartoonist do not reflect on all Danes.
As for the ayats mentioned above you can google and find passages from the bible that will corroborate them.
I do not base my faith in Islam based on what is mentioned in the Bible. Just like your belief has nothing to do with the Qur’an.
mindfriedo
“When the Koran i.e. Mahomet himself declares that Jesus Christ is a mere prophet (lesser than him) and that those who affirm that Jesus is the Son of God are wrong and must “desist”, he does not teaches us how to treat Christians as subjects in an Islamic state (ie; as equals)but as enemies”
I was reading some of the Ayats you mentioned above. Even a cursory glance can show that it is one belief system that is challenging another. Christians were not persecuted under Mohammad (sawa) or Ali (as). Nor do these Ayats call for oppression.
In the incident from Ali’s life, a layman (a Christian) is challenging a caliph. Muslim rulers these days kill their Muslim subjects for authority and power more freely than they kill Christians.
mindfriedo
Saker said:
“2) which was the party which decided to use a symbol clearly associated with a Bandera-like regime? (answer: the Croats with their checkerboard)”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_of_arms_of_Croatia#Historical_versions_of_the_crown_arms
Do you think there were Ustashe in Innsbruck in 1495?