The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Boyd D. Cathey Archive
"A Sickness of the Public Mind"
The Battle Flag and the Attack on Western Culture
shutterstock_258851933

Too much misinformation has been generated recently about Confederate flags and monuments. A great amount of it floating about on the Internet is as palatable and useful as what my neighbor cleans up out of his horse paddock each week—although what my neighbor cleans out actually has a better and less pungent odor about it than most of the shoddy, culturally Marxist ideological agenda pieces I’ve read.

Back in mid-June, after the Charleston shootings, the frenzied hue and cry went up and any number of accusations and charges were made against historic Confederate symbols, in particular, the Confederate Battle Flag, which is not as some supposedly “informed” writers called it, “the Stars and Bars.” (The Stars and Bars is a completely different flag with a totally different design—this error is an indication of those writers’ supine ignorance).

The best way to examine these charges in a short column is point by point, briefly and succinctly.

First, the demand was made that the Battle Flag needs to come down, that images of that flag need to be banned and suppressed, because, whatever its past may have been, it has now become in the current context a “symbol of hate” and “carried by racists,” that it “symbolizes racism.”

The problem with this argument is both historical and etiological.

Historically, the Battle Flag, with its familiar Cross of St. Andrew, was and is a square ensign that was carried by Southern troops during the War Between the States. It was not the national flag of the Confederacy that flew over slavery, but, rather, was carried by soldiers, 90-plus per cent who did not own slaves (which was roughly comparable to percentages in various regiments of the Union army, which had slave holding soldiers from Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri in its ranks; indeed, General Grant’s wife, Julia Dent Grant, owned slaves).

By contrast, the American flag, the “Stars and Stripes,” not only flew over slavery for seventy-eight years, it flew over the importation, the selling and the purchase of slaves, and the breaking up of slave families. Additionally, the Stars and Stripes flew over the infamous “Trail of Tears,” at the Sand Creek massacre of innocent Native Americans, later at the Wounded Knee massacre, over the brutal internment of thousands of Nisei Japanese American citizens in concentration camps during World War II, and during the action at My Lai during the Vietnam War.

Although there are some zealots who now suggest doing away with the American flag because of these connections, I would suggest that most of the pundits on the Neoconservative Fox News and amongst the Republican governors presently clamoring for banning the Battle Flag would not join them in this demand. Yet, if we examine closely the history of both banners from the radically changing contexts that are used to attack the one, should we not focus as well on the history of other banner, as well? And, pray tell, if only a particular snap shot context is used to judge such symbols, is any symbol of America’s variegated history safe from the hands of those who may dislike or despise this or that symbol?

Second, a comparison has been made between the Battle Flag and the Nazi flag (red background, with a white circle and a black swastika centered). Again, this comparison is ridiculous and demonstrates an utter lack of historical acumen on the part of those making it: the Nazi flag was created precisely to represent the Nazi Party and its ideology. The Battle Flag was designed to represent the historic Celtic and Christian origin of many Southerners and served as a soldier’ flag.

Third, the charge has been made that we should ban Confederate symbols because they represent “treason against the Federal government.” That is, those Southerners who took up arms in 1861 to defend their states, their homes, and their families, were engaged in “rebellion” and were “traitors” under Federal law.

Again, such arguments fail miserably on all counts. Some writers have suggested that Robert E. Lee, in particular, was a “traitor,” that he violated his solemn military oath to uphold and defend the Constitution by his actions. But what those writers fail to note is that Lee had formally resigned from the US Army and his commission before undertaking his new assignment to defend his home state of Virginia, which by then had seceded and re-vindicated its original independence.

And that brings us to point four: the right of secession and whether the actions of the Southern states, December 1860-May 1861, could be justified under the US Constitution.

One of the best summaries of the prevalent Constitutional theory at that time has been made recently by black scholar, professor, and prolific author Dr. Walter Williams. I quote from one his columns:

During the 1787 Constitutional Convention, a proposal was made that would allow the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison rejected it, saying, ‘A union of the states containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a state would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound.’

In fact, the ratification documents of Virginia, New York and Rhode Island explicitly said they held the right to resume powers delegated should the federal government become abusive of those powers. The Constitution never would have been ratified if states thought they could not regain their sovereignty — in a word, secede.

On March 2, 1861, after seven states seceded and two days before Abraham Lincoln’s inauguration, Sen. James R. Doolittle of Wisconsin proposed a constitutional amendment that read, “No state or any part thereof, heretofore admitted or hereafter admitted into the union, shall have the power to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the United States.”

ORDER IT NOW

Several months earlier, Reps. Daniel E. Sickles of New York, Thomas B. Florence of Pennsylvania and Otis S. Ferry of Connecticut proposed a constitutional amendment to prohibit secession. Here’s a question for the reader: Would there have been any point to offering these amendments if secession were already unconstitutional? [my emphasis added]

Let me add that an examination of the ratification processes for Georgia, South Carolina, and in my own North Carolina in the late 1780s, reveal very similar discussions: it was the independent states themselves that had created a Federal government (and not the reverse, as Abe Lincoln erroneously and incredibly suggested), and it was the various states that granted the Federal government certain very limited and specifically enumerated powers, reserving the vast remainder for themselves. As any number of the Founders indicated (cf. Elliott’s Debates and voluminous correspondence on this point), there simply would not have been any United States if the states, both north and south, had believed that they could not leave it for just cause.

Interestingly, in my many years of research I can find only one, possibly two, American presidents who openly and frankly denied the right of secession (of course, there is John Quincy Adams, but carefully). Even in March of 1861, lame duck President James Buchanan in his farewell address, while deploring secession in the strongest terms, stated frankly that, under the Constitution he had “no power to halt or interdict it.” Former President John Tyler served in the Confederate Congress, and former President Franklin Pierce, in his famous Concord, New Hampshire, address, July 4, 1863, joined Buchanan in decrying the efforts to suppress the secession of the Southern states:

“Do we not all know that the cause of our casualties is the vicious intermeddling of too many of the citizens of the Northern States with the constitutional rights of the Southern States, cooperating with the discontents of the people of those states? Do we not know that the disregard of the Constitution, and of the security that it affords to the rights of States and of individuals, has been the cause of the calamity which our country is called to undergo?”

More, during the antebellum period William Rawle’s pro-secession text on Constitutional law, A View of the Constitution of the United States (1825,) was used at West Point as the standard text on the US Constitution. And on several occasions the Supreme Court, itself, affirmed this view. In The Bank of Augusta v. Earl (1839), the Court wrote in an 8-1 decision:

“The States…are distinct separate sovereignties, except so far as they have parted with some of the attributes of sovereignty by the Constitution. They continue to be nations, with all their rights, and under all their national obligations, and with all the rights of nations in every particular; except in the surrender by each to the common purposes and object of the Union, under the Constitution. The rights of each State, when not so yielded up, remain absolute.”

A review of the Northern press at the time of the Secession conventions finds, perhaps surprisingly to those who wish to read back into the past their own statist ideas, a similar view: few newspapers took the position that the Federal government had the constitutional right to invade and suppress states that had decided to secede.

Indeed, were it not the New England states in 1814-1815 who made the first serious effort at secession during the War of 1812, to the point that they gathered in Hartford to discuss actively pursuing it? And during the pre-war period various states asserted in one form or another similar rights.

One last point regarding the accusation of “treason”: consider that after the conclusion of the War, the Southern states were put under military authority, their civil governments dissolved, and each state had to be re-admitted to the Union. Now, unless the logic I learned in university is wrong, you cannot be “re-admitted” to something unless you have been out of it. And if you were out of it, legally and constitutionally, as the Southern states maintained (and many Northern writers acknowledged), then you cannot be in any way guilty of “treason.”

The major point that opponents of Confederate symbols assert is that the panoply of those monuments, flags, plaques, and other reminders actually represent a defense of slavery. And since we as a society have supposedly advanced progressively in our understanding, it is both inappropriate and hurtful to continue to display them.

Again, there are various levels of response. Historically, despite the best efforts of the ideologically-driven Marxist historical school (e.g., Eric Foner) to make slavery the only issue underlying the War Between the States, there is abundant evidence—while not ignoring the significance of slavery—to indicate more profound economic reasons why that war occurred (cf. writers Thomas di Lorenzo, Charles Adams, David Gordon, Jeffrey Hummel, William Marvel, Thomas Fleming, et al). Indeed, it goes without saying that when hostilities began, anti-slavery was not a major reason at all in the North for prosecuting the war; indeed, it never was a major reason, as Lincoln made explicit to editor Horace Greeley of The New York Tribune a short time prior to the Emancipation Proclamation (which only applied to states in the South where the Federal government had no authority, but not to the states such as Maryland and Kentucky, where slavery existed, but were safely under Union control).

Here is what he wrote to Greeley on August 22, 1862:

“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy Slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about Slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save this Union, and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.”

The Emancipation Proclamation was a desperate political ploy by Lincoln to churn up sagging support for a war that appeared stale-mated at the time. Indeed, Old Abe had previously called for sending blacks back to Africa and the enforcement of laws that made Jim Crow look benign. He knew fully well that “freeing the slaves” had no support in the North and was not the reason for the conflict.

Professor di Lorenzo, returning afresh to original sources, focuses on the deeper, all-encompassing economic motives:

“Whatever other reasons some of the Southern states might have given for secession is irrelevant to the question of why there was a war. Secession does not necessitate war. Lincoln promised war over tax collection in his first inaugural address. When the Southern states refused to pay his beloved Morrill Tariff at the Southern ports [monies that supplied a major portion of Federal revenues], he kept his promise of ‘invasion and bloodshed’ and waged war on the Southern states.”

Indeed, late in the conflict the Confederate government authorized the formation of black units to fight for the Confederacy, with manumission to accompany such service. As many as 30,000 black men fought for the Confederacy. Would a society ideologically intent on preserving in toto the peculiar institution as the reason for war, even in such dire straits, enact such a measure?

It is, of course, easy to read back into a complex context then what appears so right and natural to us now; but it does a disservice to history, as the late Professor Eugene Genovese, perhaps the finest historian of the Old South, fully understood. Understanding the intellectual struggle in which many Southerners engaged over the issue of slavery, he cautioned readers about rash judgments based on politically correct presentist ideas of justice and right, and in several books and numerous essays defended those leaders of the Old South who were faced with difficult decisions and a nearly intractable context.

And more, he understood as too many writers fail to do today, that selecting this or that symbol of our collective history, singling it out for our smug disapprobation and condemnation, may make us feel good temporarily, but does nothing to address the deeper problems afflicting our benighted society.

As I have written elsewhere about Dylann Roof, the lone gunman responsible for the Charleston shootings: if a rabid fox comes out of the woods and bites someone, you don’t burn the woods down, you stop the fox.

In the United States today we live in a country characterized by what historian Thomas Fleming has written afflicted this nation in 1860—“a disease of the public mind,” that is, a collective madness, lacking in both reflection and prudential understanding of our history. Too many authors advance willy-nilly down the slippery slope—thus, if we ban the Battle Flag, why not destroy all those monuments to Lee and Jackson. And why stop there? Washington and Jefferson were slave holders, were they not? Obliterate and erase those names from our lexicon, tear down their monuments! Fort Hood, Fort Bragg, Fort Gordon? Change those names, for they remind us of Confederate generals! Let’s dig up Nathan Bedford Forest! Amazon sells “Gone with Wind?” Well, to quote an inane writer at the supposedly “conservative,” Rupert Murdoch-owned New York Post, ban it, too!

It is, as I say, a slippery slope, but an incline that in fact represents a not-so-hidden agenda, a cultural Marxism, that seeks to take advantage of the genuine horror at what happened in Charleston to advance its own designs which are nothing less than remaking completely what remains of the American nation. And, since it is the South that has been most resistant to such impositions and radicalization, it is the South, the historic South, which enters the cross hairs as the most tempting target. And it is the Battle Flag—true, it has been misused on occasion—which is not just the symbol of Southern pride, but becomes the target of a broad, vicious, and zealous attack on Western Christian tradition, itself. Those attacks, then, are only the opening salvo in this renewed cleansing effort, and those who collaborate with them, good intentions or not, collaborate with the destruction of our historic civilization. For that they deserve our utmost scorn and our most vigorous and steadfast opposition.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[]
  1. That flag is no different to ISIS’s flag it stands for the same thing…. Criminals.

    Read More
    • Agree: Pacific
    • Disagree: Epaminondas
    • Replies: @Quartermaster
    I guess your handle stands for utter ignorance and stupidity then. Such a statement as yours is stupid in it's inaccuracy and extremity.
    , @Cleophus
    You, sir, are a blithering idiot. You seem to have made it through an entire article full of well metered, thoughtful, thoroughly researched facts without having learned a single, solitary thing. In case you didn't catch it, the above article plainly shows that your comment, which is phrased in such a well brain washed and sophomoric way, is entirely untrue and absolutely without merit. Yet, here you are, standing like an ignorant peasant in the mud, shouting "Witch!" "Witch!" You have no basis for your accusation except what you've heard others say, because people like you never read books, you never bother to see if the position you hold has merit, you are quite content to stand with your empty brain and add your ignorant voice to those of the other, equally mindless, rabble. It never occurs to you to research something before you open your mouth and spew forth your unthinking verbal vomit.
    The Confederate battle flag is a symbol of honor, of duty and of the defense of home and family against illegal invasion, fire and sword. It is a symbol of the Southern people, both black and white. I know this because I have thoroughly researched it. I know this because my family lived it. I also know that, no matter how many you succeed in bullying into silence with your Marxist witch hunt, you will never, NEVER, extinguish the truth of what our great Southern banner symbolizes. DEO VINDICE!
    , @Realist
    You are just spouting silly bullshit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/article/a-sickness-of-the-public-mind/#comment-1035073
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. “It is, as I say, a slippery slope, but an incline that in fact represents a not-so-hidden agenda, a cultural Marxism, that seeks to take advantage of the genuine horror at what happened in Charleston to advance its own designs which are nothing less than remaking completely what remains of the American nation. ”

    Now we get to the gist of what is really going on.

    The mass killings only serve as leverage for the anti-American Left to attack what remains of Western civilization and traditional white values.

    It’s been evident for a long time now that the Left and ruling class care nothing for blacks being butchered by other blacks. They care nothing for terrorist attacks by Muslim psychopaths against Americans, they care nothing about whites being murdered by Mexican illegals.

    What they do care about is leveraging whatever tragedy that comes about to their political advantage so they can continue their war against whites. And that’s what it is, war. Not overt, but waged against us by using the political and legal system, the MSM and academia against us. They take a little here and a little there and before you know, it’s all gone. And it’s nice and “legal”.

    Quite diabolical when you think about it.

    The question now becomes, what are the people going to do about it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @War for Blair Mountain
    It starts with staying out of SEC Football Stadiums watching Negro Ball.

    We need to be honest:AMUURRICA!!!! is a Christian Heresy...The Pope is a homosexual pedophile....so is the fat sweaty rancid cockroach John Hagee.

    Don't rule out the very real possibility of young working class Native Born White American Christian Males mass converting to Islam in the near future...you have been warned.....
  3. Pretty easily dismissed the personality types along the lines of Forrest who once shot a Black man dead for daring to look him in the eye. At age 64 years and eligible to be a member of ‘Sons of the Confederacy’, I have memories of elder family members who were born of Confederate veterans. Nice people except when it came to Blacks, then not so nice. If the article is positing racism was not endemic in the non-slave holding Southerners, well, that’s just plain bs. BTW General Lee had once observed the south opted for a political outcome (military determination) rather than the legal process and had lost and that fact settled the matter.

    Re the flags, 1) the Native American reference is a misrepresentation via a lie of omission. Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side. So, it’s not a settled, black & white issue, irrespective of what had happened at Sand Creek or the massacre on the Marias (not mentioned.)

    Insofar as the flags today, whether it were the Confederate battle flag or the stars and stripes, either could be construed to be the oppressor of Blacks in communities where Harry Belafonte had this to say:

    “There’s an old saying,”In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master … exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him.

    “It is my personal feeling that plantations exist all over America. If you walk into South Central Los Angeles, into Watts, or you walk into Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati, you’ll find people who live lives that are as degrading as anything that slavery had ever produced. They live in economic oppression, they live in a disenfranchised way. In the hearts and minds of those people, and millions of others, you’re always looking for hope, and whenever somebody within our tribe, within our group, emerges that has the position of authority and power to make a difference in the way business is done, our expectations run high. Many times, those expectations are not fulfilled. But when such an individual is in the service of those who not only perpetuate the oppression, but sometimes design the way in which it is applied, it then becomes very, very, very, very critical that we raise our voices and be heard”

    The cultural Marxism accusation is bullshit. It’s about misrepresentation and stereotype and prejudice and greed and economic and political exploitation, whether on left or right. This article exploits history for political propaganda points ever bit as much as the neo-liberal left makes up its historical revisionisms for political propaganda points.

    As far as the assault on ‘Christian values’, America’s Black communities are majority Christian, they just don’t seem to be the ‘right kind’ of Christian to suit the author’s apologetic screed.

    As for my own view, inasmuch as I would also reject (the non-existent) cultural Marxism, the sooner the “Western Christian tradition” bites the dust, the better off this world will be:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/04/16/raphaels-paradox/

    ^

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side.
     
    I really hope you're joking here, Ronald. Over the course of the nineteenth century, the US govt. unilaterally violated or abrogated one 'injun treaty' after the next. If indeed there now large numbers of Indians in the US who "honor the stars and stripes", then it must be because they are an unusually forgiving people.
    , @Epaminondas
    I've read a lot about Forrest. I don't recall reading anywhere that he murdered anyone, let alone a black person. Please cite your source for this information or be revealed as the liar or ignoramus you really are.
    , @Cleophus
    Here's a classic cultural Marxist trying to get you to believe that cultural Marxism doesn't exist. If you want to know what cultural Marxism looks like in print, read the above flatulent post. Quoting Harry Belafonte?.........Oh please!
    , @guest
    "If the article is positing racism was not endemic in the non-slave holding Southerners"

    Racism was endemic in the North, too. It's also endemic to various portions of the populace today. So what? What the Civil War has to do with "racism," I have no idea.
    , @Wally
    Get a life, West.

    You obviously hover over every article that appears here so that you can be at, or near, the top of the heap in replying.

    I also assume you are on welfare.

    , @Jay
    The essence of Cultural Marxism is the destruction of the Western Christian tradition. Your attempt to deny the existence of Cultural Marxism in the same sentence where you espouse it marks you as the enemy of any person who values his or her freedom, or who values honest argumentation.
  4. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The Democratic Party in DC has murdered over two thousand Conservative Orthodox Christian Russian Speaking Ukranians in the past year…including a young pregnant Orthodox Christian Russian Ukranian Woman who was hanged from a street light. I value this young women’s life way more than Cecil the f…..g Lion’s life.

    The Democratic Party is the number one terrorist organization on the Planet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    Most of your friends in the Republican Party--with the honorable exceptions of Ron Paul and Dana Rohrbacher--have cheered on this new cold war with Russia. Some, like McCain and Graham, have actually even accused Obama of being too soft on Russia. And then there was Baby Bush unilaterally scrapping the ABM Treaty with Russia all the way back in 2002--not long after Putin had pledged him full support in the 'War on Terror' and even made Russian airspace available for resupplying US troops in Afghanistan.

    In today's America, the Republicans are usually even bigger war-mongers and Russophobes than the Democrats.
    , @Realist
    "The Democratic Party is the number one terrorist organization on the Planet."

    That is just too silly.

    The Democrats are dickheads for sure, but so are Republicans.

    Republican Credo: Every conception should be carried to term….there will be plenty of time later to brutally kill or hideously maim the result in a needless, senseless war.
    , @cap-tite
    what a bold-faced lie!
  5. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @rod1963
    "It is, as I say, a slippery slope, but an incline that in fact represents a not-so-hidden agenda, a cultural Marxism, that seeks to take advantage of the genuine horror at what happened in Charleston to advance its own designs which are nothing less than remaking completely what remains of the American nation. "

    Now we get to the gist of what is really going on.

    The mass killings only serve as leverage for the anti-American Left to attack what remains of Western civilization and traditional white values.

    It's been evident for a long time now that the Left and ruling class care nothing for blacks being butchered by other blacks. They care nothing for terrorist attacks by Muslim psychopaths against Americans, they care nothing about whites being murdered by Mexican illegals.

    What they do care about is leveraging whatever tragedy that comes about to their political advantage so they can continue their war against whites. And that's what it is, war. Not overt, but waged against us by using the political and legal system, the MSM and academia against us. They take a little here and a little there and before you know, it's all gone. And it's nice and "legal".

    Quite diabolical when you think about it.

    The question now becomes, what are the people going to do about it?

    It starts with staying out of SEC Football Stadiums watching Negro Ball.

    We need to be honest:AMUURRICA!!!! is a Christian Heresy…The Pope is a homosexual pedophile….so is the fat sweaty rancid cockroach John Hagee.

    Don’t rule out the very real possibility of young working class Native Born White American Christian Males mass converting to Islam in the near future…you have been warned…..

    Read More
  6. (The Stars and Bars is a completely different flag with a totally different design—this error is an indication of those writers’ supine ignorance).

    Professor di Lorenzo, returning afresh to original sources, focuses on the deeper, all-encompassing economic motives:

    As many as 30,000 black men fought for the Confederacy. Would a society ideologically intent on preserving in toto the peculiar institution as the reason for war, even in such dire straits, enact such a measure?

    ditto in toto

    Read More
  7. “As I have written elsewhere about Dylann Roof, the lone gunman responsible for the Charleston shootings: if a rabid fox comes out of the woods and bites someone, you don’t burn the woods down, you stop the fox.”

    Exactly. This entire false outrage is all about collective guilt which is a disease unique to Whites. They seem to be the lone ethnic group which responds to this idea of collective guilt? How about Omar Thornton and Colin Ferguson(two Black guys who murdered Whites) there was no cry for collective guilt then? Did we cancel Kwanza?
    This is just another rhetorical cannon barrage in what Congressman Mo Brooks from Alabama labeled correctly as the War on Whites. It has been going on for forty years and will not end until YT grows a backbone.

    The problem is we all work in bureaucracies now. When the country was beginning, 85% of the population worked their own farms subsistencely, talked to the trees, and were beholden to no one. Free speech was real. Now 85% of the population works in well peopled organizations with HR departments(secret police commissars) and to say anything independent means job loss and family tragedy.

    So most YTs take the safe route and talk NFL while sipping a cool one. Meanwhile the Mainstream Media runs down their culture, their history, their ancestors and now with ‘white privilege’ the media is actually running down White people themselves. According to the media if you are White, anything you have done has not been thru your effort but given to you.

    Unstated is the codicil which is “And now it is time to take that from you YT”

    Watch out kids, they are coming for you.

    Read More
  8. … a broad, vicious, and zealous attack on Western Christian tradition, itself. Those attacks, then, are only the opening salvo in this renewed cleansing effort, and those who collaborate with them, good intentions or not, collaborate with the destruction of our historic civilization.

    But that’s what they want, or more to the point, not so much the destruction of Western Civilization per se (what’s left of it) but the destruction of the Western peoples, for whom Western civilization is a natural expression of their DNA.

    The real meaning of that flag is the spirit of resistance to tyranny. It is that mouse giving the hawk the middle finger.

    http://bp2.blogger.com/_HhIlygcZLkg/RsRrwjTeIiI/AAAAAAAAARM/abnywRmgSQc/s400/Last+Act+Of+Defiance.JPG

    That flag is an erect middle finger shoved in the face of those who would see not just the south and its people humiliated and degraded, but all people who don’t bow to central government power and the petty tyrants who wield it. The hysteria over the flag says far more about the people frothing that the flag be banned than it says about southern culture or its people.

    Read More
  9. @Ronald Thomas West
    Pretty easily dismissed the personality types along the lines of Forrest who once shot a Black man dead for daring to look him in the eye. At age 64 years and eligible to be a member of 'Sons of the Confederacy', I have memories of elder family members who were born of Confederate veterans. Nice people except when it came to Blacks, then not so nice. If the article is positing racism was not endemic in the non-slave holding Southerners, well, that's just plain bs. BTW General Lee had once observed the south opted for a political outcome (military determination) rather than the legal process and had lost and that fact settled the matter.

    Re the flags, 1) the Native American reference is a misrepresentation via a lie of omission. Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side. So, it's not a settled, black & white issue, irrespective of what had happened at Sand Creek or the massacre on the Marias (not mentioned.)

    Insofar as the flags today, whether it were the Confederate battle flag or the stars and stripes, either could be construed to be the oppressor of Blacks in communities where Harry Belafonte had this to say:

    “There’s an old saying,”In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master … exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him.

    “It is my personal feeling that plantations exist all over America. If you walk into South Central Los Angeles, into Watts, or you walk into Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati, you’ll find people who live lives that are as degrading as anything that slavery had ever produced. They live in economic oppression, they live in a disenfranchised way. In the hearts and minds of those people, and millions of others, you’re always looking for hope, and whenever somebody within our tribe, within our group, emerges that has the position of authority and power to make a difference in the way business is done, our expectations run high. Many times, those expectations are not fulfilled. But when such an individual is in the service of those who not only perpetuate the oppression, but sometimes design the way in which it is applied, it then becomes very, very, very, very critical that we raise our voices and be heard”
     
    The cultural Marxism accusation is bullshit. It's about misrepresentation and stereotype and prejudice and greed and economic and political exploitation, whether on left or right. This article exploits history for political propaganda points ever bit as much as the neo-liberal left makes up its historical revisionisms for political propaganda points.

    As far as the assault on 'Christian values', America's Black communities are majority Christian, they just don't seem to be the 'right kind' of Christian to suit the author's apologetic screed.

    As for my own view, inasmuch as I would also reject (the non-existent) cultural Marxism, the sooner the "Western Christian tradition" bites the dust, the better off this world will be:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/04/16/raphaels-paradox/

    ^

    Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side.

    I really hope you’re joking here, Ronald. Over the course of the nineteenth century, the US govt. unilaterally violated or abrogated one ‘injun treaty’ after the next. If indeed there now large numbers of Indians in the US who “honor the stars and stripes”, then it must be because they are an unusually forgiving people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West

    it must be because they are an unusually forgiving people
     
    Actually, they are. In the Plains culture is in the tradition of 'the Peace Chiefs'
  10. @Ronald Thomas West
    Pretty easily dismissed the personality types along the lines of Forrest who once shot a Black man dead for daring to look him in the eye. At age 64 years and eligible to be a member of 'Sons of the Confederacy', I have memories of elder family members who were born of Confederate veterans. Nice people except when it came to Blacks, then not so nice. If the article is positing racism was not endemic in the non-slave holding Southerners, well, that's just plain bs. BTW General Lee had once observed the south opted for a political outcome (military determination) rather than the legal process and had lost and that fact settled the matter.

    Re the flags, 1) the Native American reference is a misrepresentation via a lie of omission. Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side. So, it's not a settled, black & white issue, irrespective of what had happened at Sand Creek or the massacre on the Marias (not mentioned.)

    Insofar as the flags today, whether it were the Confederate battle flag or the stars and stripes, either could be construed to be the oppressor of Blacks in communities where Harry Belafonte had this to say:

    “There’s an old saying,”In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master … exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him.

    “It is my personal feeling that plantations exist all over America. If you walk into South Central Los Angeles, into Watts, or you walk into Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati, you’ll find people who live lives that are as degrading as anything that slavery had ever produced. They live in economic oppression, they live in a disenfranchised way. In the hearts and minds of those people, and millions of others, you’re always looking for hope, and whenever somebody within our tribe, within our group, emerges that has the position of authority and power to make a difference in the way business is done, our expectations run high. Many times, those expectations are not fulfilled. But when such an individual is in the service of those who not only perpetuate the oppression, but sometimes design the way in which it is applied, it then becomes very, very, very, very critical that we raise our voices and be heard”
     
    The cultural Marxism accusation is bullshit. It's about misrepresentation and stereotype and prejudice and greed and economic and political exploitation, whether on left or right. This article exploits history for political propaganda points ever bit as much as the neo-liberal left makes up its historical revisionisms for political propaganda points.

    As far as the assault on 'Christian values', America's Black communities are majority Christian, they just don't seem to be the 'right kind' of Christian to suit the author's apologetic screed.

    As for my own view, inasmuch as I would also reject (the non-existent) cultural Marxism, the sooner the "Western Christian tradition" bites the dust, the better off this world will be:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/04/16/raphaels-paradox/

    ^

    I’ve read a lot about Forrest. I don’t recall reading anywhere that he murdered anyone, let alone a black person. Please cite your source for this information or be revealed as the liar or ignoramus you really are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
    It was in one of the couple of dozen books on the war I've read. Will 300 murdered Blacks do?

    http://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/fort-pillow-massacre

    So, Forrest 'got religion' before he died, it doesn't change anything about his character -
  11. @War for Blair Mountain
    The Democratic Party in DC has murdered over two thousand Conservative Orthodox Christian Russian Speaking Ukranians in the past year...including a young pregnant Orthodox Christian Russian Ukranian Woman who was hanged from a street light. I value this young women's life way more than Cecil the f.....g Lion's life.

    The Democratic Party is the number one terrorist organization on the Planet.

    Most of your friends in the Republican Party–with the honorable exceptions of Ron Paul and Dana Rohrbacher–have cheered on this new cold war with Russia. Some, like McCain and Graham, have actually even accused Obama of being too soft on Russia. And then there was Baby Bush unilaterally scrapping the ABM Treaty with Russia all the way back in 2002–not long after Putin had pledged him full support in the ‘War on Terror’ and even made Russian airspace available for resupplying US troops in Afghanistan.

    In today’s America, the Republicans are usually even bigger war-mongers and Russophobes than the Democrats.

    Read More
  12. “Even in March of 1861, lame duck President James Buchanan in his farewell address, while deploring secession in the strongest terms, stated frankly that, under the Constitution he had ‘no power to halt or interdict it.’”

    Cf. https://www.whitehouse.gov/1600/presidents/jamesbuchanan

    “President Buchanan, dismayed and hesitant, denied the legal right of states to secede but held that the Federal Government legally could not prevent them. He hoped for compromise, but secessionist leaders did not want compromise.”

    Read More
  13. @Pacific
    That flag is no different to ISIS's flag it stands for the same thing.... Criminals.

    I guess your handle stands for utter ignorance and stupidity then. Such a statement as yours is stupid in it’s inaccuracy and extremity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pacific
    Confederate flag is a symbol of white supremacist and slavery ....

    We are told america has moved forward from those days but some of you remain in the dark old days....

    some samples.....
    , @Quartermaster
    , @Cleophus
    , @Realist

    Why don't you move forward and embrace the current flag of the USA??? And Hold your head high.....
  14. War for Blair Mountain [AKA "Great Battle for Blair Mountain"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I’m not a member of the Republican Party….never was. Noam Chomsky’s favorite voting bloc…the highly racialized nonwhite Democratic Party Voting Bloc…. voted enthusiastically to install the current Democratic Party Regime in DC-a regime guilty of mass murder in the Ukraine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    Congress is 'controlled' by Republicans which have been extremely supportive of hegemony across the planet.
  15. What a load of crap. Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states. The exact same kind of thing tinfoil hat types claim the UN is plotting. Lincoln was right to stop it with force; but he was careful to let the seditionists fire the first shots at fort Sumter to preclude the exact arguments lost causers would make.

    He issued the emancipation proclamation not out of desperation but on the heels of a major victory. He realized that to win the war, slavery had to be destroyed. There was no going back to the status quo ante bellum without the southern slave power holding sway over the federal government. The south had to be broken. It was the right thing to do and it was done for a myriad of reasons, none of them involving desperation.

    There was nothing honorable about the confederacy. Its legacy and symbols belong in a museum next to the history of slavery and racism. That’s where they would be had northern political will not failed reconstruction, civil rights, and the national memory.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states.
     
    F the sovereignty of the United States

    I wouldn't give a plug nickel for the so called sovereignty of the United States today. Our fecal government is an illegal abomination of what it was designed to be. It treats the Constitution like toilet paper. It assassinates American citizens without due process. It wages illegal wars of aggression against innocent countries and people based on lies - and mass murders and maims millions of innocents world wide. It enslaves our military veterans through 'Stop Loss' just as much as any 19th century African slave was held in bondage. Only rather than being forced to pick cotton, our young men and women are forced to engage in human rights atrocities. No wonder they're committing suicide in droves.

    The day the fecal government broke the sacred covenant between free men and coercive government at the point of a gun, is the day the United States government lost its legitimacy. On that day it became an illegal entity and no American of good will or sound mind owed it anything but antipathy.

    Without the consent of the governed, the federal government has zero legitimacy. Just as much as a slaver owner over a slave.
    , @guest
    "Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states. The exact same kind of thing tinfoil hat types claim the UN is plotting."

    More like the opposite.
    , @Seamus Padraig

    He issued the emancipation proclamation not out of desperation but on the heels of a major victory. He realized that to win the war, slavery had to be destroyed.
     
    If the "major victory" you're referring to is Gettysburg, that battle actually occurred eights months after the Emancipation Proclamation had been issued. Like a lot people, you're probably confusing the EP with the Gettysburg Address--the latter having taken place eleven months after the former.
    , @Orville H. Larson
    Piss on Lincoln, that warmongering, statist, racist, Constitution-defiling scumbag. He set the stage for what we have today. And piss on his war crimes-committing commanders Grant, Sherman et al.
  16. @Epaminondas
    I've read a lot about Forrest. I don't recall reading anywhere that he murdered anyone, let alone a black person. Please cite your source for this information or be revealed as the liar or ignoramus you really are.

    It was in one of the couple of dozen books on the war I’ve read. Will 300 murdered Blacks do?

    http://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/fort-pillow-massacre

    So, Forrest ‘got religion’ before he died, it doesn’t change anything about his character -

    Read More
    • Replies: @Epaminondas
    I'm aware of that account. It has been debunked by dozens of scholars. The only people who trot that out are those with an ax to grind. It's no different from thousands of inaccurate slurs on Southern leaders. Right up there with the one about Lee beating his slaves. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Not a liar, just a gullible ignoramus who WANTS to believe the worst of Southerners.
  17. @Pacific
    That flag is no different to ISIS's flag it stands for the same thing.... Criminals.

    You, sir, are a blithering idiot. You seem to have made it through an entire article full of well metered, thoughtful, thoroughly researched facts without having learned a single, solitary thing. In case you didn’t catch it, the above article plainly shows that your comment, which is phrased in such a well brain washed and sophomoric way, is entirely untrue and absolutely without merit. Yet, here you are, standing like an ignorant peasant in the mud, shouting “Witch!” “Witch!” You have no basis for your accusation except what you’ve heard others say, because people like you never read books, you never bother to see if the position you hold has merit, you are quite content to stand with your empty brain and add your ignorant voice to those of the other, equally mindless, rabble. It never occurs to you to research something before you open your mouth and spew forth your unthinking verbal vomit.
    The Confederate battle flag is a symbol of honor, of duty and of the defense of home and family against illegal invasion, fire and sword. It is a symbol of the Southern people, both black and white. I know this because I have thoroughly researched it. I know this because my family lived it. I also know that, no matter how many you succeed in bullying into silence with your Marxist witch hunt, you will never, NEVER, extinguish the truth of what our great Southern banner symbolizes. DEO VINDICE!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pacific
    Sorry I don't get brain washed Easily......
    look up some facts for a change.

    List of white nationalist organizations then come back to me and tell me America does not have a problem Americans are second to only Nazi Germany.....

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_white_nationalist_organizations

    I suggest all three of you do this....
    , @Quartermaster
    , @Cleophus
    , @Realist
  18. @Pacific
    That flag is no different to ISIS's flag it stands for the same thing.... Criminals.

    You are just spouting silly bullshit.

    Read More
  19. @Ronald Thomas West
    Pretty easily dismissed the personality types along the lines of Forrest who once shot a Black man dead for daring to look him in the eye. At age 64 years and eligible to be a member of 'Sons of the Confederacy', I have memories of elder family members who were born of Confederate veterans. Nice people except when it came to Blacks, then not so nice. If the article is positing racism was not endemic in the non-slave holding Southerners, well, that's just plain bs. BTW General Lee had once observed the south opted for a political outcome (military determination) rather than the legal process and had lost and that fact settled the matter.

    Re the flags, 1) the Native American reference is a misrepresentation via a lie of omission. Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side. So, it's not a settled, black & white issue, irrespective of what had happened at Sand Creek or the massacre on the Marias (not mentioned.)

    Insofar as the flags today, whether it were the Confederate battle flag or the stars and stripes, either could be construed to be the oppressor of Blacks in communities where Harry Belafonte had this to say:

    “There’s an old saying,”In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master … exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him.

    “It is my personal feeling that plantations exist all over America. If you walk into South Central Los Angeles, into Watts, or you walk into Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati, you’ll find people who live lives that are as degrading as anything that slavery had ever produced. They live in economic oppression, they live in a disenfranchised way. In the hearts and minds of those people, and millions of others, you’re always looking for hope, and whenever somebody within our tribe, within our group, emerges that has the position of authority and power to make a difference in the way business is done, our expectations run high. Many times, those expectations are not fulfilled. But when such an individual is in the service of those who not only perpetuate the oppression, but sometimes design the way in which it is applied, it then becomes very, very, very, very critical that we raise our voices and be heard”
     
    The cultural Marxism accusation is bullshit. It's about misrepresentation and stereotype and prejudice and greed and economic and political exploitation, whether on left or right. This article exploits history for political propaganda points ever bit as much as the neo-liberal left makes up its historical revisionisms for political propaganda points.

    As far as the assault on 'Christian values', America's Black communities are majority Christian, they just don't seem to be the 'right kind' of Christian to suit the author's apologetic screed.

    As for my own view, inasmuch as I would also reject (the non-existent) cultural Marxism, the sooner the "Western Christian tradition" bites the dust, the better off this world will be:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/04/16/raphaels-paradox/

    ^

    Here’s a classic cultural Marxist trying to get you to believe that cultural Marxism doesn’t exist. If you want to know what cultural Marxism looks like in print, read the above flatulent post. Quoting Harry Belafonte?………Oh please!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    I agree. What the hell would Harry Belafonte know about slavery....or anything else? Talk about someone with an IQ under 90, I am sure Harry's IQ is far below.
    Harry like all American black descendants of slaves are the luckiest blacks on the planets.
  20. @Seamus Padraig

    Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side.
     
    I really hope you're joking here, Ronald. Over the course of the nineteenth century, the US govt. unilaterally violated or abrogated one 'injun treaty' after the next. If indeed there now large numbers of Indians in the US who "honor the stars and stripes", then it must be because they are an unusually forgiving people.

    it must be because they are an unusually forgiving people

    Actually, they are. In the Plains culture is in the tradition of ‘the Peace Chiefs’

    Read More
  21. @War for Blair Mountain
    The Democratic Party in DC has murdered over two thousand Conservative Orthodox Christian Russian Speaking Ukranians in the past year...including a young pregnant Orthodox Christian Russian Ukranian Woman who was hanged from a street light. I value this young women's life way more than Cecil the f.....g Lion's life.

    The Democratic Party is the number one terrorist organization on the Planet.

    “The Democratic Party is the number one terrorist organization on the Planet.”

    That is just too silly.

    The Democrats are dickheads for sure, but so are Republicans.

    Republican Credo: Every conception should be carried to term….there will be plenty of time later to brutally kill or hideously maim the result in a needless, senseless war.

    Read More
  22. @War for Blair Mountain
    I'm not a member of the Republican Party....never was. Noam Chomsky's favorite voting bloc...the highly racialized nonwhite Democratic Party Voting Bloc.... voted enthusiastically to install the current Democratic Party Regime in DC-a regime guilty of mass murder in the Ukraine.

    Congress is ‘controlled’ by Republicans which have been extremely supportive of hegemony across the planet.

    Read More
  23. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Fort Pillow “massacre” is a myth created by northern yellow journalists. See:

    http://www.armchairgeneral.com/nathan-bedford-forrest-and-the-battle-of-fort-pillow-1864.htm

    for a more insightful & honest review.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
    So, you appreciate historical revisionism, probably you appreciate the media lies giving cover to neo-nazis (plenty of those frequenting UNZ REVIEW) in Ukraine too -
  24. There is a lot of hate here – in these comments directed at this article and at life in general.

    I understand the author’s viewpoint, but I insist that he is missing something far more important than the issue of a flag. What exactly is it that allowed race-based slavery for financial gain in the first place? Why is racism so pervasive throughout American history, including even in the hearts of many from the North (like President Abraham Lincoln) who are credited with ending the institution of slavery?

    What happened to the Native Americans and then the Japanese and Vietnamese…is happening again right now with regards to the Muslims. Actually, we can say that American actions in the Muslim world are far worse than what has happened in other dark periods of American history. Yet, the left and the right, the conservatives and liberals, the republicans and democrats, the north and south…all continue on while only being worried about flags or their particular race or their lifestyle or wealth accumulation (and that sort of thing)!

    Power corrupts. Money is the root of all evil. And it is the American economy that keeps the monumental diversity of people together (and by diversity I am not only talking about ethnic groups but also ideologies and belief systems). In this, I find it quite ironic that the author of this article is using cultural marxism as a scapegoat. Don’t support Marxism, but be fair and honest in your blame towards it, and stay away from conspiracy theories. Many of today’s problems are the consequence of success, of conquering the world, of overseeing a global empire, and of creating a new, dominant culture whose values infringe upon the values of many many other communities and cultures (particularly those that are more traditional and more religious).

    The perceived victimization some White Americans feel (and in particular, those in the south who are proud of their culture and heritage) is truly misplaced and misguided. Non-white communities in the US are the ones suffering the most, all while bombs are dropped on poor third world countries composed mainly of non-whites! America’s conflicts with Germany and Russia however should be brought up in fairness as well since these are cases where wealthy nations-states with a White, Christian majority have fought one another or opposed one another. Poor white communities in the US are suffering, certainly. It is unfortunate though that so many of them enlist in the armed forces in order to escape that poverty. When the rich wage war, the poor suffer the most.

    The author here should reassess what it really means to be a Christian, and whether southern culture was ever really a representation of that. Rather than using cultural marxism as a scapegoat…isn’t secularism a far greater corruption of Christianity and a culture based on Christian values as compared to whether you have a free-market system or a state-run economy?

    It can be said that Russian society (though secular and still very liberal)…is more conservative now and closer to its Christian roots as compared to America. This despite the fact that the Russian system is far more socialist as compared to capitalist America.

    People want to have pride in their culture and where they are from…I get that. But too much pride is a dangerous thing (indeed, it is the primary attribute of satan which caused his downfall). The only advice I can convey is to remind each and every person that they will die alone, and that when they face our Creator after death, they will be held to account for their beliefs as well as their deeds. One’s skin tone, country of origin, culture, heritage, lineage, and so forth – will be of no benefit at that point in time.

    Prophet Muhammad (saaws) said (in the Farewell Sermon): “All mankind is from Adam and Eve. An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor does a non-Arab have any superiority over an Arab; A White has no superiority over a Black nor does a Black have any superiority over a White…except in piety and good deeds”

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    For a post supposedly getting past the jibber-jabber to the root of things, it was remarkably muddled and full of conflation. I'm guessing the point was "The love of money is the root of all evil." Good to know.
    , @Hibernian
    "The perceived victimization some White Americans feel (and in particular, those in the south who are proud of their culture and heritage) is truly misplaced and misguided."

    When you're poor and white, you're out of sight.
  25. @Cleophus
    Here's a classic cultural Marxist trying to get you to believe that cultural Marxism doesn't exist. If you want to know what cultural Marxism looks like in print, read the above flatulent post. Quoting Harry Belafonte?.........Oh please!

    I agree. What the hell would Harry Belafonte know about slavery….or anything else? Talk about someone with an IQ under 90, I am sure Harry’s IQ is far below.
    Harry like all American black descendants of slaves are the luckiest blacks on the planets.

    Read More
  26. @Cesare
    What a load of crap. Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states. The exact same kind of thing tinfoil hat types claim the UN is plotting. Lincoln was right to stop it with force; but he was careful to let the seditionists fire the first shots at fort Sumter to preclude the exact arguments lost causers would make.

    He issued the emancipation proclamation not out of desperation but on the heels of a major victory. He realized that to win the war, slavery had to be destroyed. There was no going back to the status quo ante bellum without the southern slave power holding sway over the federal government. The south had to be broken. It was the right thing to do and it was done for a myriad of reasons, none of them involving desperation.

    There was nothing honorable about the confederacy. Its legacy and symbols belong in a museum next to the history of slavery and racism. That's where they would be had northern political will not failed reconstruction, civil rights, and the national memory.

    Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states.

    F the sovereignty of the United States

    I wouldn’t give a plug nickel for the so called sovereignty of the United States today. Our fecal government is an illegal abomination of what it was designed to be. It treats the Constitution like toilet paper. It assassinates American citizens without due process. It wages illegal wars of aggression against innocent countries and people based on lies – and mass murders and maims millions of innocents world wide. It enslaves our military veterans through ‘Stop Loss’ just as much as any 19th century African slave was held in bondage. Only rather than being forced to pick cotton, our young men and women are forced to engage in human rights atrocities. No wonder they’re committing suicide in droves.

    The day the fecal government broke the sacred covenant between free men and coercive government at the point of a gun, is the day the United States government lost its legitimacy. On that day it became an illegal entity and no American of good will or sound mind owed it anything but antipathy.

    Without the consent of the governed, the federal government has zero legitimacy. Just as much as a slaver owner over a slave.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Orville H. Larson
    Hell, you took the words right out of my mouth.

    "I wouldn't give a plug nickel for the so called sovereignty of the United States today. Our fecal government is an illegal abomination of what it was designed to be. It treats the Constitution like toilet paper. It assassinates American citizens without due process. It wages illegal wars of aggression . . . and mass murders and maims millions of innocents world wide. . . ."

    Can any discerning American dispute this? . . .
  27. @Anonymous
    Fort Pillow "massacre" is a myth created by northern yellow journalists. See:

    http://www.armchairgeneral.com/nathan-bedford-forrest-and-the-battle-of-fort-pillow-1864.htm

    for a more insightful & honest review.

    So, you appreciate historical revisionism, probably you appreciate the media lies giving cover to neo-nazis (plenty of those frequenting UNZ REVIEW) in Ukraine too -

    Read More
  28. @Ronald Thomas West
    It was in one of the couple of dozen books on the war I've read. Will 300 murdered Blacks do?

    http://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/fort-pillow-massacre

    So, Forrest 'got religion' before he died, it doesn't change anything about his character -

    I’m aware of that account. It has been debunked by dozens of scholars. The only people who trot that out are those with an ax to grind. It’s no different from thousands of inaccurate slurs on Southern leaders. Right up there with the one about Lee beating his slaves. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. Not a liar, just a gullible ignoramus who WANTS to believe the worst of Southerners.

    Read More
  29. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Hmm, nobody here seems to be distinguishing between endorsement of the battle flag by private citizens, on the one hand, and by state governments on the other, at taxpayers’ expense. Also, nobody mentions the crucial matter of _when_ the battle flag was first hoisted over three southern state capitols. It was in the early sixties, as a symbol of massive resistance to the Civil Rights movement. It was hate, not heritage. Or rather, hate _was_ the heritage.

    I’m a white southerner, from a rural working-class family, born in 1954, the year of Brown vs The Board of Education. Almost all of my adult relatives heaped contempt upon their black neighbors at every opportunity. It was an article of faith that had to be constantly reaffirmed. My grandfather enjoyed telling stories of the lynchings he had witnessed as a boy. –It was (and still is) a pathology that traces back to Reconstruction days, when suddenly poor whites lost their legal and social “superiority” to blacks. This was a huge psychic trauma for them, a disaster for their precarious self-esteem, and their descendents carried the resentful scars long after the historical details had faded. My uneducated relatives didn’t know the history; they simply _were_ the history. And when the Civil Rights era rolled around, they fell back in love with the Stars & Bars–which at that point had been relegated mostly to museums for many decades. But now it appeared in the windows of houses and shops.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bliss
    • Replies: @guest
    "nobody here seem to be distinguishing between endorsement of the battle flag by private citizens, on the one hand, and by state governments on the other, at taxpayers’ expense"

    I don't distinguish, actually. It doesn't seem like an important enough expenditure for me to comment upon. I could go through state budgets line by line, I suppose, and tell them whether I think the carpet or drapes at their capitals are too fancy, or whether they're using too many paperclips. But that seems like a waste of time.
    , @conatus
    "My grandfather enjoyed telling stories of the lynchings he had witnessed as a boy. –"
    I always thought all the lynchings were Black lynchings and then I looked it up and much to my surprise 27% were White guys.

    http://faculty.berea.edu/browners/chesnutt/classroom/lynchingstat.html
    , @guest
    "nobody mentions the crucial matter of _when_ the battle flag was first hoisted over three southern state capitols. It was in the early sixties, as a symbol of massive resistance to the Civil Rights movement. It was hate, not heritage. Or rather, hate _was_ the heritage."

    There were reasons other than "hate" to oppose the Civil Rights Movement. I happen to disagree with de jure racial discrimination, though I don't agree with the urgency with which the federal government suddenly pursued its destruction in the 50s and 60s. The feds had absolutely no authority to mess with private discrimination, however, and there I would agree with erstwhile Jim Crowers. The battle flag is an appropriate symbol for resistance to such things, though not necessarily the most appropriate. It was and is symbolic of the struggle against the presumption of our central government.

    This isn't really about any of that, however. That's a sideshow.
    , @Cleophus
    I'm afraid you're simply wrong in your basic premise that the Confederate Battle
    Flag was raised "as a massive symbol of resistance to the civil rights movement." It was raised, not as a symbol of "racism" or "oppression," but in commemoration of the centennial of he War Between the States. If you don't believe me, go back and read the resolutions that officially put them in place. From Alabama to Georgia and every Southern State in between that chose to honor the Confederacy with this symbol, it was done as a commemoration of their State's role in the Confederacy, and nothing else. Now the Southern People, however, the people whom you seem to want to portray as pellagra ridden, dirt floor cabin dwellers who were too ignorant to understand anything but the most base forms of hatred for their fellow man; well, I guess you'll just have to mark that up to the trashy family that it was your sorry luck to be born into, because the South I grew up in didn't wasn't anything like that. I was born in 1947, one of the first "baby boomers" in Lauderdale County, Alabama. I grew up in a Christian family of 3 boys and 5 girls, and it may astound you to find out that we had wood floors and electricity and a big Zenith black dial table top radio. This radio was our window to the world, which my Momma and Daddy would use to listen to the local news and the events of the world. It may also astound you that, almost every weekend, the black family from down the road, (our closest neighbors), would come and listen to the "Grand Ole' Opry" and "News Around The Globe" with us. It may also deflate your hatred to know that this very same black family worked right beside us in the cotton fields, picking cotton. You see, both of our families were sharecroppers working the same man's land, and from what I could tell, when it come time to weigh our crops, both Mr. Edwards, the father of the black family, and my Daddy got paid the same amount for the same weight of cotton. Though Mr. Edwards 3 girls did raise a truck patch for themselves to make extra money. They went to a different church than we did, but it wasn't because they were black, it was because they were Baptist and we were Church of Christ. If they had wanted to attend our church, I know they would have been more than welcome. You are trying to paint the entire Southland with the dirty paint from your tainted families pot and that's just not right. I didn't grow up the way you described, hating black people and talking about lynchings. I grew up with my head bobbing up and down in the cotton fields under the hot autumn sun right beside my black neighbors.
    Were there differences? Yes, of course their were. We knew there was a line socially and culturally not to be crossed, but it was a line drawn by both sides, both black and white, and it was a boundary easily and freely kept. It didn't interfere with our families helping each other, or going fishing or swimming together. It's just the way things were at the time.
    You say that your "uneducated relatives didn't know the history," regarding the Confederacy and the Confederate flag. I find that VERY hard to believe. From the time I was old enough to walk, I was told stories about our Confederate heroes like Patrick Cleburne and Stonewall Jackson, as well as the exploits of my own family members who served, (my Great Granddaddy served in the 16th Alabama infantry, Company C), and fought all over the South during the war, and I was, and am, extremely proud of that fact. The point I'm making is that, any boy raised up from after the war to at least the 1980's knew by heart the great battles and the heroic Southern men who fought in them. It was just part of being a boy in the South. If your family didn't know it's history, and spent it's time hating blacks and revering lynchings, don't try to make that sickness out to be a representation of the whole South. That's your cross to bear, not the South's.
    When the civil rights struggle started, the Southern people who you try to portray as backward and inherently "racist" were in reality neither one. The Southern people realized that the federal government had far overstepped it's bounds in interfering with the way the Sovereign States handled their social and cultural matters. The people of the State of Alabama, both black and white, had voted and decreed that "separate but equal" was going to be law of the land. The federal government had no Constitutional right to interfere in that decision. When the president illegally decided to send federal troops into the South to defy Alabama law, the people, knowing their history, and knowing that this was a profound and egregious encroachment upon the rights of the States, began to fly the Battle Flag as a symbol of defiance and resistance to the tyranny of the federal government. It was never used as a symbol of so called "racism."
    Who is to blame for using the Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of "racism?" Does it really matter? Every person is going to make of the flag what he will, no power on earth can change that. For me, the Confederate Battle Flag will always stand as a proud symbol of the defense of home and family against overwhelming odds, and of heroism in battle, and honor, and duty, and, most especially the everlasting defiance of tyranny. What everyone else makes out of it, well, that's up to them. They can follow the truth of history, or they can follow a narrative of lies. In the end, it still comes down to what each individual thinks.
    , @William BadWhite
    "I'm a white southerner, from a rural working-class family, born in 1954, the year of Brown vs The Board of Education. Almost all of my adult relatives heaped contempt upon their black neighbors at every opportunity"

    You're either full of shit or descended from white trash. Or I suppose a combination of both. I'm also a white southerner, ancestors on both my father's and mother's side fought for the Confederacy (and in the American Revolution and French & Indian Wars prior; in WW1, and WW2, Korea, Vietnam after). I've never heard one of my elderly relatives "heap contempt" upon blacks. Do they consider blacks equal? No, they don't. However there is no "hate" or "contempt" there, merely a calm view of reality. As an example a black neighbor of my grandfather (who owned a saw mill) moved from Arkansas to Detroit in the late 40's to work in the auto plants. He called my grandfather a month or so later and said that he wanted to come home. My grandfather arranged for his transportation back to Arkansas. Would you consider a grown man that called the local white land owner to get him back home your equal?

    They saved their contempt and animosity for the white trash that should know better than to live like they do. Also for Yankees constantly poking their noses into other people's business.

  30. @Ronald Thomas West
    Pretty easily dismissed the personality types along the lines of Forrest who once shot a Black man dead for daring to look him in the eye. At age 64 years and eligible to be a member of 'Sons of the Confederacy', I have memories of elder family members who were born of Confederate veterans. Nice people except when it came to Blacks, then not so nice. If the article is positing racism was not endemic in the non-slave holding Southerners, well, that's just plain bs. BTW General Lee had once observed the south opted for a political outcome (military determination) rather than the legal process and had lost and that fact settled the matter.

    Re the flags, 1) the Native American reference is a misrepresentation via a lie of omission. Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side. So, it's not a settled, black & white issue, irrespective of what had happened at Sand Creek or the massacre on the Marias (not mentioned.)

    Insofar as the flags today, whether it were the Confederate battle flag or the stars and stripes, either could be construed to be the oppressor of Blacks in communities where Harry Belafonte had this to say:

    “There’s an old saying,”In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master … exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him.

    “It is my personal feeling that plantations exist all over America. If you walk into South Central Los Angeles, into Watts, or you walk into Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati, you’ll find people who live lives that are as degrading as anything that slavery had ever produced. They live in economic oppression, they live in a disenfranchised way. In the hearts and minds of those people, and millions of others, you’re always looking for hope, and whenever somebody within our tribe, within our group, emerges that has the position of authority and power to make a difference in the way business is done, our expectations run high. Many times, those expectations are not fulfilled. But when such an individual is in the service of those who not only perpetuate the oppression, but sometimes design the way in which it is applied, it then becomes very, very, very, very critical that we raise our voices and be heard”
     
    The cultural Marxism accusation is bullshit. It's about misrepresentation and stereotype and prejudice and greed and economic and political exploitation, whether on left or right. This article exploits history for political propaganda points ever bit as much as the neo-liberal left makes up its historical revisionisms for political propaganda points.

    As far as the assault on 'Christian values', America's Black communities are majority Christian, they just don't seem to be the 'right kind' of Christian to suit the author's apologetic screed.

    As for my own view, inasmuch as I would also reject (the non-existent) cultural Marxism, the sooner the "Western Christian tradition" bites the dust, the better off this world will be:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/04/16/raphaels-paradox/

    ^

    “If the article is positing racism was not endemic in the non-slave holding Southerners”

    Racism was endemic in the North, too. It’s also endemic to various portions of the populace today. So what? What the Civil War has to do with “racism,” I have no idea.

    Read More
  31. @Cesare
    What a load of crap. Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states. The exact same kind of thing tinfoil hat types claim the UN is plotting. Lincoln was right to stop it with force; but he was careful to let the seditionists fire the first shots at fort Sumter to preclude the exact arguments lost causers would make.

    He issued the emancipation proclamation not out of desperation but on the heels of a major victory. He realized that to win the war, slavery had to be destroyed. There was no going back to the status quo ante bellum without the southern slave power holding sway over the federal government. The south had to be broken. It was the right thing to do and it was done for a myriad of reasons, none of them involving desperation.

    There was nothing honorable about the confederacy. Its legacy and symbols belong in a museum next to the history of slavery and racism. That's where they would be had northern political will not failed reconstruction, civil rights, and the national memory.

    “Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states. The exact same kind of thing tinfoil hat types claim the UN is plotting.”

    More like the opposite.

    Read More
  32. @Anonymous
    Hmm, nobody here seems to be distinguishing between endorsement of the battle flag by private citizens, on the one hand, and by state governments on the other, at taxpayers' expense. Also, nobody mentions the crucial matter of _when_ the battle flag was first hoisted over three southern state capitols. It was in the early sixties, as a symbol of massive resistance to the Civil Rights movement. It was hate, not heritage. Or rather, hate _was_ the heritage.

    I'm a white southerner, from a rural working-class family, born in 1954, the year of Brown vs The Board of Education. Almost all of my adult relatives heaped contempt upon their black neighbors at every opportunity. It was an article of faith that had to be constantly reaffirmed. My grandfather enjoyed telling stories of the lynchings he had witnessed as a boy. --It was (and still is) a pathology that traces back to Reconstruction days, when suddenly poor whites lost their legal and social "superiority" to blacks. This was a huge psychic trauma for them, a disaster for their precarious self-esteem, and their descendents carried the resentful scars long after the historical details had faded. My uneducated relatives didn't know the history; they simply _were_ the history. And when the Civil Rights era rolled around, they fell back in love with the Stars & Bars--which at that point had been relegated mostly to museums for many decades. But now it appeared in the windows of houses and shops.

    “nobody here seem to be distinguishing between endorsement of the battle flag by private citizens, on the one hand, and by state governments on the other, at taxpayers’ expense”

    I don’t distinguish, actually. It doesn’t seem like an important enough expenditure for me to comment upon. I could go through state budgets line by line, I suppose, and tell them whether I think the carpet or drapes at their capitals are too fancy, or whether they’re using too many paperclips. But that seems like a waste of time.

    Read More
  33. useful as what my neighbor cleans up out of his horse paddock each week

    I would kill for good horse manure.

    Trees and crops can. not. resist. growing in a field fertilized with well-rotted horse manure.

    And it repels deer.
    What’s not to like?

    Speaking of well-nourished fields yielding healthy crops, spend a few minutes listening to Mark Weber, the courageous historian at Institute for Historical Review (IHR). Weber spoke to a young audience –tender shoots that presage a good harvest — in Stockholm last April, on the topic,

    The Crisis of the West: Looking Ahead in an Age of Darkness

    (downloadable audio)

    Read More
  34. @Sonic
    There is a lot of hate here - in these comments directed at this article and at life in general.

    I understand the author's viewpoint, but I insist that he is missing something far more important than the issue of a flag. What exactly is it that allowed race-based slavery for financial gain in the first place? Why is racism so pervasive throughout American history, including even in the hearts of many from the North (like President Abraham Lincoln) who are credited with ending the institution of slavery?

    What happened to the Native Americans and then the Japanese and Vietnamese...is happening again right now with regards to the Muslims. Actually, we can say that American actions in the Muslim world are far worse than what has happened in other dark periods of American history. Yet, the left and the right, the conservatives and liberals, the republicans and democrats, the north and south...all continue on while only being worried about flags or their particular race or their lifestyle or wealth accumulation (and that sort of thing)!

    Power corrupts. Money is the root of all evil. And it is the American economy that keeps the monumental diversity of people together (and by diversity I am not only talking about ethnic groups but also ideologies and belief systems). In this, I find it quite ironic that the author of this article is using cultural marxism as a scapegoat. Don't support Marxism, but be fair and honest in your blame towards it, and stay away from conspiracy theories. Many of today's problems are the consequence of success, of conquering the world, of overseeing a global empire, and of creating a new, dominant culture whose values infringe upon the values of many many other communities and cultures (particularly those that are more traditional and more religious).

    The perceived victimization some White Americans feel (and in particular, those in the south who are proud of their culture and heritage) is truly misplaced and misguided. Non-white communities in the US are the ones suffering the most, all while bombs are dropped on poor third world countries composed mainly of non-whites! America's conflicts with Germany and Russia however should be brought up in fairness as well since these are cases where wealthy nations-states with a White, Christian majority have fought one another or opposed one another. Poor white communities in the US are suffering, certainly. It is unfortunate though that so many of them enlist in the armed forces in order to escape that poverty. When the rich wage war, the poor suffer the most.

    The author here should reassess what it really means to be a Christian, and whether southern culture was ever really a representation of that. Rather than using cultural marxism as a scapegoat...isn't secularism a far greater corruption of Christianity and a culture based on Christian values as compared to whether you have a free-market system or a state-run economy?

    It can be said that Russian society (though secular and still very liberal)...is more conservative now and closer to its Christian roots as compared to America. This despite the fact that the Russian system is far more socialist as compared to capitalist America.

    People want to have pride in their culture and where they are from...I get that. But too much pride is a dangerous thing (indeed, it is the primary attribute of satan which caused his downfall). The only advice I can convey is to remind each and every person that they will die alone, and that when they face our Creator after death, they will be held to account for their beliefs as well as their deeds. One's skin tone, country of origin, culture, heritage, lineage, and so forth - will be of no benefit at that point in time.

    Prophet Muhammad (saaws) said (in the Farewell Sermon): “All mankind is from Adam and Eve. An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor does a non-Arab have any superiority over an Arab; A White has no superiority over a Black nor does a Black have any superiority over a White…except in piety and good deeds”

    For a post supposedly getting past the jibber-jabber to the root of things, it was remarkably muddled and full of conflation. I’m guessing the point was “The love of money is the root of all evil.” Good to know.

    Read More
  35. @Ronald Thomas West
    Pretty easily dismissed the personality types along the lines of Forrest who once shot a Black man dead for daring to look him in the eye. At age 64 years and eligible to be a member of 'Sons of the Confederacy', I have memories of elder family members who were born of Confederate veterans. Nice people except when it came to Blacks, then not so nice. If the article is positing racism was not endemic in the non-slave holding Southerners, well, that's just plain bs. BTW General Lee had once observed the south opted for a political outcome (military determination) rather than the legal process and had lost and that fact settled the matter.

    Re the flags, 1) the Native American reference is a misrepresentation via a lie of omission. Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side. So, it's not a settled, black & white issue, irrespective of what had happened at Sand Creek or the massacre on the Marias (not mentioned.)

    Insofar as the flags today, whether it were the Confederate battle flag or the stars and stripes, either could be construed to be the oppressor of Blacks in communities where Harry Belafonte had this to say:

    “There’s an old saying,”In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master … exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him.

    “It is my personal feeling that plantations exist all over America. If you walk into South Central Los Angeles, into Watts, or you walk into Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati, you’ll find people who live lives that are as degrading as anything that slavery had ever produced. They live in economic oppression, they live in a disenfranchised way. In the hearts and minds of those people, and millions of others, you’re always looking for hope, and whenever somebody within our tribe, within our group, emerges that has the position of authority and power to make a difference in the way business is done, our expectations run high. Many times, those expectations are not fulfilled. But when such an individual is in the service of those who not only perpetuate the oppression, but sometimes design the way in which it is applied, it then becomes very, very, very, very critical that we raise our voices and be heard”
     
    The cultural Marxism accusation is bullshit. It's about misrepresentation and stereotype and prejudice and greed and economic and political exploitation, whether on left or right. This article exploits history for political propaganda points ever bit as much as the neo-liberal left makes up its historical revisionisms for political propaganda points.

    As far as the assault on 'Christian values', America's Black communities are majority Christian, they just don't seem to be the 'right kind' of Christian to suit the author's apologetic screed.

    As for my own view, inasmuch as I would also reject (the non-existent) cultural Marxism, the sooner the "Western Christian tradition" bites the dust, the better off this world will be:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/04/16/raphaels-paradox/

    ^

    Get a life, West.

    You obviously hover over every article that appears here so that you can be at, or near, the top of the heap in replying.

    I also assume you are on welfare.

    Read More
  36. Wally [AKA "BobbyBeGood"] says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Black researcher, Dr. Tony Martin, let’s us know who the prime owners of slaves really were.
    see:
    ‘Suppressing Jewry’s Role in Slavery / Familiar Tactics’

    http://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=7909

    also:
    Dr. Tony Martin – ‘The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade’

    Thanks.

    Read More
  37. @Anonymous
    Hmm, nobody here seems to be distinguishing between endorsement of the battle flag by private citizens, on the one hand, and by state governments on the other, at taxpayers' expense. Also, nobody mentions the crucial matter of _when_ the battle flag was first hoisted over three southern state capitols. It was in the early sixties, as a symbol of massive resistance to the Civil Rights movement. It was hate, not heritage. Or rather, hate _was_ the heritage.

    I'm a white southerner, from a rural working-class family, born in 1954, the year of Brown vs The Board of Education. Almost all of my adult relatives heaped contempt upon their black neighbors at every opportunity. It was an article of faith that had to be constantly reaffirmed. My grandfather enjoyed telling stories of the lynchings he had witnessed as a boy. --It was (and still is) a pathology that traces back to Reconstruction days, when suddenly poor whites lost their legal and social "superiority" to blacks. This was a huge psychic trauma for them, a disaster for their precarious self-esteem, and their descendents carried the resentful scars long after the historical details had faded. My uneducated relatives didn't know the history; they simply _were_ the history. And when the Civil Rights era rolled around, they fell back in love with the Stars & Bars--which at that point had been relegated mostly to museums for many decades. But now it appeared in the windows of houses and shops.

    “My grandfather enjoyed telling stories of the lynchings he had witnessed as a boy. –”
    I always thought all the lynchings were Black lynchings and then I looked it up and much to my surprise 27% were White guys.

    http://faculty.berea.edu/browners/chesnutt/classroom/lynchingstat.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Author Ed Falco just wrote "The Family Corleone," a "prequel" to Mario Puzo's crime family classic, "The Godfather."

    There were a number of things that surprised me in my initial research. I knew something about our nation's early antipathy toward Catholics and Italians, but I had not fully appreciated the depth of that antagonism. For example, the largest mass lynching in U.S. history took place in New Orleans in 1891 — and it wasn't African-Americans who were lynched, as many of us might assume. It was Italian-Americans.

    After nine Italians were tried and found not guilty of murdering New Orleans Police Chief David Hennessy, a mob dragged them from the jail, along with two other Italians being held on unrelated charges, and lynched them all. The lynchings were followed by mass arrests of Italian immigrants throughout New Orleans, and waves of attacks against Italians nationwide.

    What was the reaction of our country's leaders to the lynchings?

    ---> Teddy Roosevelt, not yet president, famously said they were "a rather good thing."

    ---> The response in The New York Times was worse. A March 16, 1891, editorial referred to the victims of the lynchings as "... sneaking and cowardly Sicilians, the descendants of bandits and assassins."

    ---> An editorial the next day argued that: "Lynch law was the only course open to the people of New Orleans. ..."
     

    ---

    Have Jews ever been lynched in the USA?

    What if some Italian Jacob Schiff reacted to the lynching of Italians the way Schiff did to the pogrom of Jews in Kishinev?

  38. @Anonymous
    Hmm, nobody here seems to be distinguishing between endorsement of the battle flag by private citizens, on the one hand, and by state governments on the other, at taxpayers' expense. Also, nobody mentions the crucial matter of _when_ the battle flag was first hoisted over three southern state capitols. It was in the early sixties, as a symbol of massive resistance to the Civil Rights movement. It was hate, not heritage. Or rather, hate _was_ the heritage.

    I'm a white southerner, from a rural working-class family, born in 1954, the year of Brown vs The Board of Education. Almost all of my adult relatives heaped contempt upon their black neighbors at every opportunity. It was an article of faith that had to be constantly reaffirmed. My grandfather enjoyed telling stories of the lynchings he had witnessed as a boy. --It was (and still is) a pathology that traces back to Reconstruction days, when suddenly poor whites lost their legal and social "superiority" to blacks. This was a huge psychic trauma for them, a disaster for their precarious self-esteem, and their descendents carried the resentful scars long after the historical details had faded. My uneducated relatives didn't know the history; they simply _were_ the history. And when the Civil Rights era rolled around, they fell back in love with the Stars & Bars--which at that point had been relegated mostly to museums for many decades. But now it appeared in the windows of houses and shops.

    “nobody mentions the crucial matter of _when_ the battle flag was first hoisted over three southern state capitols. It was in the early sixties, as a symbol of massive resistance to the Civil Rights movement. It was hate, not heritage. Or rather, hate _was_ the heritage.”

    There were reasons other than “hate” to oppose the Civil Rights Movement. I happen to disagree with de jure racial discrimination, though I don’t agree with the urgency with which the federal government suddenly pursued its destruction in the 50s and 60s. The feds had absolutely no authority to mess with private discrimination, however, and there I would agree with erstwhile Jim Crowers. The battle flag is an appropriate symbol for resistance to such things, though not necessarily the most appropriate. It was and is symbolic of the struggle against the presumption of our central government.

    This isn’t really about any of that, however. That’s a sideshow.

    Read More
  39. @conatus
    "My grandfather enjoyed telling stories of the lynchings he had witnessed as a boy. –"
    I always thought all the lynchings were Black lynchings and then I looked it up and much to my surprise 27% were White guys.

    http://faculty.berea.edu/browners/chesnutt/classroom/lynchingstat.html

    Author Ed Falco just wrote “The Family Corleone,” a “prequel” to Mario Puzo’s crime family classic, “The Godfather.”

    There were a number of things that surprised me in my initial research. I knew something about our nation’s early antipathy toward Catholics and Italians, but I had not fully appreciated the depth of that antagonism. For example, the largest mass lynching in U.S. history took place in New Orleans in 1891 — and it wasn’t African-Americans who were lynched, as many of us might assume. It was Italian-Americans.

    After nine Italians were tried and found not guilty of murdering New Orleans Police Chief David Hennessy, a mob dragged them from the jail, along with two other Italians being held on unrelated charges, and lynched them all. The lynchings were followed by mass arrests of Italian immigrants throughout New Orleans, and waves of attacks against Italians nationwide.

    What was the reaction of our country’s leaders to the lynchings?

    —> Teddy Roosevelt, not yet president, famously said they were “a rather good thing.”

    —> The response in The New York Times was worse. A March 16, 1891, editorial referred to the victims of the lynchings as “… sneaking and cowardly Sicilians, the descendants of bandits and assassins.”

    —> An editorial the next day argued that: “Lynch law was the only course open to the people of New Orleans. …”

    Have Jews ever been lynched in the USA?

    What if some Italian Jacob Schiff reacted to the lynching of Italians the way Schiff did to the pogrom of Jews in Kishinev?

    Read More
  40. @Cesare
    What a load of crap. Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states. The exact same kind of thing tinfoil hat types claim the UN is plotting. Lincoln was right to stop it with force; but he was careful to let the seditionists fire the first shots at fort Sumter to preclude the exact arguments lost causers would make.

    He issued the emancipation proclamation not out of desperation but on the heels of a major victory. He realized that to win the war, slavery had to be destroyed. There was no going back to the status quo ante bellum without the southern slave power holding sway over the federal government. The south had to be broken. It was the right thing to do and it was done for a myriad of reasons, none of them involving desperation.

    There was nothing honorable about the confederacy. Its legacy and symbols belong in a museum next to the history of slavery and racism. That's where they would be had northern political will not failed reconstruction, civil rights, and the national memory.

    He issued the emancipation proclamation not out of desperation but on the heels of a major victory. He realized that to win the war, slavery had to be destroyed.

    If the “major victory” you’re referring to is Gettysburg, that battle actually occurred eights months after the Emancipation Proclamation had been issued. Like a lot people, you’re probably confusing the EP with the Gettysburg Address–the latter having taken place eleven months after the former.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    The "major victory" in question was at the Battle of Sharpsburg/Antietam, on September 17, 1862. Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on September 22, 1862 to take effect on January 1, 1863.
  41. @Seamus Padraig

    He issued the emancipation proclamation not out of desperation but on the heels of a major victory. He realized that to win the war, slavery had to be destroyed.
     
    If the "major victory" you're referring to is Gettysburg, that battle actually occurred eights months after the Emancipation Proclamation had been issued. Like a lot people, you're probably confusing the EP with the Gettysburg Address--the latter having taken place eleven months after the former.

    The “major victory” in question was at the Battle of Sharpsburg/Antietam, on September 17, 1862. Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on September 22, 1862 to take effect on January 1, 1863.

    Read More
  42. @Quartermaster
    I guess your handle stands for utter ignorance and stupidity then. Such a statement as yours is stupid in it's inaccuracy and extremity.

    Confederate flag is a symbol of white supremacist and slavery ….

    We are told america has moved forward from those days but some of you remain in the dark old days….

    some samples…..
    ,
    ,
    ,

    Why don’t you move forward and embrace the current flag of the USA??? And Hold your head high…..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    "I suggest all three of you do this….
    , @Quartermaster
    , @Cleophus
    , @Realist"

    Because we don't agree with you?

    Many white people believe in free association and don't like to be told who to associate with. And do not like to pay taxes to support those who will not work.

  43. @Cleophus
    You, sir, are a blithering idiot. You seem to have made it through an entire article full of well metered, thoughtful, thoroughly researched facts without having learned a single, solitary thing. In case you didn't catch it, the above article plainly shows that your comment, which is phrased in such a well brain washed and sophomoric way, is entirely untrue and absolutely without merit. Yet, here you are, standing like an ignorant peasant in the mud, shouting "Witch!" "Witch!" You have no basis for your accusation except what you've heard others say, because people like you never read books, you never bother to see if the position you hold has merit, you are quite content to stand with your empty brain and add your ignorant voice to those of the other, equally mindless, rabble. It never occurs to you to research something before you open your mouth and spew forth your unthinking verbal vomit.
    The Confederate battle flag is a symbol of honor, of duty and of the defense of home and family against illegal invasion, fire and sword. It is a symbol of the Southern people, both black and white. I know this because I have thoroughly researched it. I know this because my family lived it. I also know that, no matter how many you succeed in bullying into silence with your Marxist witch hunt, you will never, NEVER, extinguish the truth of what our great Southern banner symbolizes. DEO VINDICE!

    Sorry I don’t get brain washed Easily……
    look up some facts for a change.

    List of white nationalist organizations then come back to me and tell me America does not have a problem Americans are second to only Nazi Germany…..

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_white_nationalist_organizations

    I suggest all three of you do this….
    ,
    ,
    ,

    Read More
  44. The current hysteria about the Confederate battle flag is generated by the corporate media in service to the Anglo/Zionist Empire. It’s good to keep us divided against each other. This prevents us from uniting against them.

    How is it that these United States evolved into an imperial power bent on ruling the world by force of arms? The war between the States set us on the course of Empire. This was Lincoln’s doing. The creation of the Federal Reserve set us on the road to ruin. This was Wilson’s doing.

    The working class is black and white, northern and southern, democrat and republican, male and female, gay and straight, American and Russian, Christian and Muslim. The working class here in America wants work and wages not war and welfare. The latter is the will of the .01%.

    Meditate on the power of solidarity to achieve peace and prosperity. Workers of the world unite!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    WorkingClass - you make some very good points. I'll only add that it is a bit more that 0.01%, and that there are many people (including from the working class) who blindly follow and support the elites responsible for the underlying ideologies that enable what you mentioned. The underlying ideologies that support Empire (such as American Exceptionalism and the belief that the US has a duty to spread its culture, way of life, and political ideologies throughout the world).

    Also, we must note that the slaughter of the Native Americans and race-based slavery for economic gain are things that occurred before the American Civil War and before the establishment of the Federal Reserve. We also need to consider the centuries of European colonialism whose affects are still being witnessed in the Middle East and Third World. The US war for independence was in fact, also a war against European colonialism (but in a different way). Racism as represented in European culture through such things as the "Manifest Destiny" policy, carried over into the culture and psyche of America (most of the 13 colonies were composed of people of European descent after all).

    This then may have played a role in America's domestic and foreign policies towards poor people of color at home (where they are the majority in various prison camps) and abroad (where most of the nations being bombed today are poor countries of people of color with rich resources). When trying to talk about this though, people tend to look for scapegoats or conspiracy theories while insisting on having unwavering pride and patriotism (whether to this flag or that)!
  45. @Pacific
    Confederate flag is a symbol of white supremacist and slavery ....

    We are told america has moved forward from those days but some of you remain in the dark old days....

    some samples.....
    , @Quartermaster
    , @Cleophus
    , @Realist

    Why don't you move forward and embrace the current flag of the USA??? And Hold your head high.....

    “I suggest all three of you do this….
    ,
    ,
    , ”

    Because we don’t agree with you?

    Many white people believe in free association and don’t like to be told who to associate with. And do not like to pay taxes to support those who will not work.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pacific
    I don't have to have you agree but i would like you and others to see that there is two sides to all stories.
  46. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    For my part I must admit to a personal view of this controversy. My kin were on both sides, Union and Confederate. Brother fought brother, cousin against cousin, uncles and nephews chose different sides. One flew the Stars and Stripes, the other fought under the Battle Flag. They fought hard and killed they each other. But, even in the midst of battle, sometimes a cheer would go up from the Union lines to the Confederates or from the Confederates to their Union adversaries- one side honoring the other for its bravery and valor. I see it as the same with flying the Battle Flag. My forefathers, who fought for the Union, so respected my kin, who fought for the Confederacy, that they granted them the right to fly their Battle Flag after the War. That’s the way it is in families.
    I suggest to you, and to any others who have a problem with this- just leave it alone. It’s a family matter and unless you can prove yours were there, you get no say.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    In America, they do get to voice an opinion, regardless of how impersonal or ignorant it is. That's the real issue here.
  47. Why don’t you move forward and embrace the current flag of the USA??? And Hold your head high…..

    take a look at how the current flag of the USA looks in embrace

    look up some facts for a change.
    List of white nationalist organizations then come back to me and tell me America does not have a problem Americans are second to only Nazi Germany…..

    The Nazi SS had soldiers from all over the world, the most thoroughly integrated and superbly trained fighting force in history. Of course Germans had an ancient tradition of integrating its warriors: Germans were hi-performing elements of Roman fighting forces that included men from all over the Roman empire, from Britain to Egypt to the borders of Persia.

    USA, on the other hand, segregated its troops. When Black GIs returned home from WWII, they were denied the benefits of housing and education that white GIs received under the GI Bill. Black WWII veterans were lynched.

    Persistent resort to reductio ad Hitlerum and reductio ad Nazismus completely undermines credibility and reveals only ignorance and acquiescence to mob mentality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Enrique Cardova
    The Nazi SS had soldiers from all over the world, the most thoroughly integrated and superbly trained fighting force in history.

    Rather dubious. When did the Nazi SS ever have black soldiers for example? Or Chinese? lol


    And yes they were a solid well trained force, but who says they were the most "superbly trained fighting force in history"? The US Marines in WW2 are more than a match for the SS, and they proved themselves against some of the toughest opposition - the fanatical, suicidal Japanese of WW2. Oh and by the way the SS did pretty good against unarmed civilians- several hundreds of thousands of Jews. All that "superb training" must have come in handy in shooting children in the mass graves of Poland and the Ukraine for example. Its easy to be a tough guy when you attacking people that's can't shoot back. But when they met the American boys of the "Big Red One" for example, people who could actually shoot back, turns out they weren't so tough.

    The Big Red One was a veteran of three amphibious assaults in North Africa, Sicily and Normandy. It had fought in deserts, mountains, plains and cities, in extreme heat and cold, against every kind of opponent. With 16 Medal of Honor recipients, the '"Big Red One" more than holds its own in comparisons.

    .
    USA, on the other hand, segregated its troops. When Black GIs returned home from WWII, they were denied the benefits of housing and education that white GIs received under the GI Bill. Black WWII veterans were lynched.
    True enough and in WW2 it is a little known fact that the German propaganda excoriated the US for preaching democracy abroad, while practicing segregation and disenfranchisement at home. But the SS was very much itself into segregation- certain "subhuman races" could not join. Somewere actually slated for extermination- the ultimate segregation sanction.

  48. @Realist
    "I suggest all three of you do this….
    , @Quartermaster
    , @Cleophus
    , @Realist"

    Because we don't agree with you?

    Many white people believe in free association and don't like to be told who to associate with. And do not like to pay taxes to support those who will not work.

    I don’t have to have you agree but i would like you and others to see that there is two sides to all stories.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    "I don’t have to have you agree but i would like you and others to see that there is two sides to all stories."

    Oh, I agree there is the right side and then there is yours.
  49. This is an impressively researched article; it brought out a number of issues I hadn’t been aware of. But I can’t judge how complete it is. So, I’d like to mention a larger, related issue that I’m getting very tired of.

    I don’t like this phenomenon in which there is a mass hen-pecking of a selected person or symbol. In this case, it was decided that the Confederate battle flag had to go. The hens circled, and started pecking. Once they start pecking, they’re also looking around to see who is not helping with the pecking; those people will also receive their share.

    Last week, it was the Confederate battle flag. This week, it is the dentist who apparently shot a well-liked lion. The hens have circled, and they’re pecking, and keeping track of who is not participating. Next week, who knows.

    I’m seriously getting tired of this as a social improvement technique.

    Read More
  50. @Rurik

    Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states.
     
    F the sovereignty of the United States

    I wouldn't give a plug nickel for the so called sovereignty of the United States today. Our fecal government is an illegal abomination of what it was designed to be. It treats the Constitution like toilet paper. It assassinates American citizens without due process. It wages illegal wars of aggression against innocent countries and people based on lies - and mass murders and maims millions of innocents world wide. It enslaves our military veterans through 'Stop Loss' just as much as any 19th century African slave was held in bondage. Only rather than being forced to pick cotton, our young men and women are forced to engage in human rights atrocities. No wonder they're committing suicide in droves.

    The day the fecal government broke the sacred covenant between free men and coercive government at the point of a gun, is the day the United States government lost its legitimacy. On that day it became an illegal entity and no American of good will or sound mind owed it anything but antipathy.

    Without the consent of the governed, the federal government has zero legitimacy. Just as much as a slaver owner over a slave.

    Hell, you took the words right out of my mouth.

    “I wouldn’t give a plug nickel for the so called sovereignty of the United States today. Our fecal government is an illegal abomination of what it was designed to be. It treats the Constitution like toilet paper. It assassinates American citizens without due process. It wages illegal wars of aggression . . . and mass murders and maims millions of innocents world wide. . . .”

    Can any discerning American dispute this? . . .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik
    Thanks,

    It's well past time to dig the Confederate battle flag out of cobwebbed storage. Not as a symbol of Southern heritage, but as a symbol of American men and women today who will not be slaves. As a symbol of righteous and freedom in the face of tyranny and the treason of a corrupt and criminal and murderous central government.

    We need to declare secession today. First in our hearts and then on a broader scale.

    The enemy of the American people are not the Iraqis or the Syrians. It isn't the Iranians or the Libyans. Our most intractable and committed enemy- who wants to enslave us and trample our rights and put bullets in us if we resist, is not Vladimir Putin or China or ISIS. No. The enemy of the United States constitution and the threats to the freedom of the American people are today the very treasonous scum who swore a sacred oath to protect that Constitution.

    Our enemy, the enemy of the American people are the people who voted to authorize the NDAA.

    The ones who vote to bomb countries and people who they know are innocent. Can you even imagine the evil that must lurk in the black heart of a politician who casts a vote to mass-murder innocent people based on known lies because they consider it politically expedient to do so? IOW for a handful of shekels?

    Our enemies are the treasonous scum who facilitate the fecal's surveillance/police state spying on us. They are our enemies. They are not spying on you to keep you safe. They're spying on you to keep you in chains. Chains that are forged in the moral cowardice of the American people's missing character today. The most noble and honorable thing we Americans could do (of all races and creeds) would be to fly the Confederate flag of resistance to tyranny bold and proud, as never before. To demand that we are not party to mass murder and mindless destruction of other people's countries because a hand full of rabid Zionists like Sheldon Adelson and Rupert Murdoch control our whore politicians.

    It's way past time to say No! to all of this.

    It's time to dig that flag out of storage and put it proudly on a pole. Today it says what the founders of this country were telling King George; that they would not be slaves to tyranny. Today it is the Confederate flag that stands for freedom, for honor, and for the inviolate dignity of the individual. Because it is the rebel flag of secession from and resistance to a government that has become an oppressor and has treasonously violated the covenant (the Constitution) between itself and the governed.

    What they are trying to do is to cow us all into obedience to their central memes. To their narratives that Americans are the 'exceptional people' so long as we're willing to kill and die for Israel- thousands of miles away, but at home we are to walk with bowed head, ashamed of ourselves and who and what we are. I for one intend to tell them to pound sand. The jig is up.
  51. @WorkingClass
    The current hysteria about the Confederate battle flag is generated by the corporate media in service to the Anglo/Zionist Empire. It's good to keep us divided against each other. This prevents us from uniting against them.

    How is it that these United States evolved into an imperial power bent on ruling the world by force of arms? The war between the States set us on the course of Empire. This was Lincoln's doing. The creation of the Federal Reserve set us on the road to ruin. This was Wilson's doing.

    The working class is black and white, northern and southern, democrat and republican, male and female, gay and straight, American and Russian, Christian and Muslim. The working class here in America wants work and wages not war and welfare. The latter is the will of the .01%.

    Meditate on the power of solidarity to achieve peace and prosperity. Workers of the world unite!

    WorkingClass – you make some very good points. I’ll only add that it is a bit more that 0.01%, and that there are many people (including from the working class) who blindly follow and support the elites responsible for the underlying ideologies that enable what you mentioned. The underlying ideologies that support Empire (such as American Exceptionalism and the belief that the US has a duty to spread its culture, way of life, and political ideologies throughout the world).

    Also, we must note that the slaughter of the Native Americans and race-based slavery for economic gain are things that occurred before the American Civil War and before the establishment of the Federal Reserve. We also need to consider the centuries of European colonialism whose affects are still being witnessed in the Middle East and Third World. The US war for independence was in fact, also a war against European colonialism (but in a different way). Racism as represented in European culture through such things as the “Manifest Destiny” policy, carried over into the culture and psyche of America (most of the 13 colonies were composed of people of European descent after all).

    This then may have played a role in America’s domestic and foreign policies towards poor people of color at home (where they are the majority in various prison camps) and abroad (where most of the nations being bombed today are poor countries of people of color with rich resources). When trying to talk about this though, people tend to look for scapegoats or conspiracy theories while insisting on having unwavering pride and patriotism (whether to this flag or that)!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    But it is important to note that America, Europe, and those of Caucasian descent do not have a monopoly on racism and racist thought. Rather, racism can be found in every community and country in the world. The first racist was Iblees (Lucifer), and so the fight against racism is a fight against the devil; against satanism and satanic inclinations; against secularism and polytheism; against pride and arrogance; against contemporary (but misguided) understandings of liberty and free speech.

    {O Mankind! Behold, We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes so that you might (affectionately) come to know one another. Verily, the most honored among you, in the Sight of Allah, is the one who lives most upright. Behold, Allah is all-Knowing, all-Aware} Quran 49:13
    , @WorkingClass
    @Sonic

    Thank you for your reply. And yes the impulse to imperialism existed in the colonies from the beginning. The American apple could not fall far from the British tree. Yet the framers made an heroic attempt to break with the imperial past. I pick on Lincoln because he undid their work. The constitution, sans federalism, is already not the constitution.
  52. @Sonic
    WorkingClass - you make some very good points. I'll only add that it is a bit more that 0.01%, and that there are many people (including from the working class) who blindly follow and support the elites responsible for the underlying ideologies that enable what you mentioned. The underlying ideologies that support Empire (such as American Exceptionalism and the belief that the US has a duty to spread its culture, way of life, and political ideologies throughout the world).

    Also, we must note that the slaughter of the Native Americans and race-based slavery for economic gain are things that occurred before the American Civil War and before the establishment of the Federal Reserve. We also need to consider the centuries of European colonialism whose affects are still being witnessed in the Middle East and Third World. The US war for independence was in fact, also a war against European colonialism (but in a different way). Racism as represented in European culture through such things as the "Manifest Destiny" policy, carried over into the culture and psyche of America (most of the 13 colonies were composed of people of European descent after all).

    This then may have played a role in America's domestic and foreign policies towards poor people of color at home (where they are the majority in various prison camps) and abroad (where most of the nations being bombed today are poor countries of people of color with rich resources). When trying to talk about this though, people tend to look for scapegoats or conspiracy theories while insisting on having unwavering pride and patriotism (whether to this flag or that)!

    But it is important to note that America, Europe, and those of Caucasian descent do not have a monopoly on racism and racist thought. Rather, racism can be found in every community and country in the world. The first racist was Iblees (Lucifer), and so the fight against racism is a fight against the devil; against satanism and satanic inclinations; against secularism and polytheism; against pride and arrogance; against contemporary (but misguided) understandings of liberty and free speech.

    {O Mankind! Behold, We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes so that you might (affectionately) come to know one another. Verily, the most honored among you, in the Sight of Allah, is the one who lives most upright. Behold, Allah is all-Knowing, all-Aware} Quran 49:13

    Read More
  53. @Pacific
    I don't have to have you agree but i would like you and others to see that there is two sides to all stories.

    “I don’t have to have you agree but i would like you and others to see that there is two sides to all stories.”

    Oh, I agree there is the right side and then there is yours.

    Read More
  54. @Ronald Thomas West
    Pretty easily dismissed the personality types along the lines of Forrest who once shot a Black man dead for daring to look him in the eye. At age 64 years and eligible to be a member of 'Sons of the Confederacy', I have memories of elder family members who were born of Confederate veterans. Nice people except when it came to Blacks, then not so nice. If the article is positing racism was not endemic in the non-slave holding Southerners, well, that's just plain bs. BTW General Lee had once observed the south opted for a political outcome (military determination) rather than the legal process and had lost and that fact settled the matter.

    Re the flags, 1) the Native American reference is a misrepresentation via a lie of omission. Many Native Americans, even those who acknowledge the miscreant behaviors of the Americans and their military violations, honor the stars and stripes for the fact they had kept the treaties and to this day respect the treaties original intent from the Native American side. So, it's not a settled, black & white issue, irrespective of what had happened at Sand Creek or the massacre on the Marias (not mentioned.)

    Insofar as the flags today, whether it were the Confederate battle flag or the stars and stripes, either could be construed to be the oppressor of Blacks in communities where Harry Belafonte had this to say:

    “There’s an old saying,”In the days of slavery, there were those slaves who lived on the plantation and there were those slaves that lived in the house. You got the privilege of living in the house if you served the master … exactly the way the master intended to have you serve him.

    “It is my personal feeling that plantations exist all over America. If you walk into South Central Los Angeles, into Watts, or you walk into Over-the-Rhine in Cincinnati, you’ll find people who live lives that are as degrading as anything that slavery had ever produced. They live in economic oppression, they live in a disenfranchised way. In the hearts and minds of those people, and millions of others, you’re always looking for hope, and whenever somebody within our tribe, within our group, emerges that has the position of authority and power to make a difference in the way business is done, our expectations run high. Many times, those expectations are not fulfilled. But when such an individual is in the service of those who not only perpetuate the oppression, but sometimes design the way in which it is applied, it then becomes very, very, very, very critical that we raise our voices and be heard”
     
    The cultural Marxism accusation is bullshit. It's about misrepresentation and stereotype and prejudice and greed and economic and political exploitation, whether on left or right. This article exploits history for political propaganda points ever bit as much as the neo-liberal left makes up its historical revisionisms for political propaganda points.

    As far as the assault on 'Christian values', America's Black communities are majority Christian, they just don't seem to be the 'right kind' of Christian to suit the author's apologetic screed.

    As for my own view, inasmuch as I would also reject (the non-existent) cultural Marxism, the sooner the "Western Christian tradition" bites the dust, the better off this world will be:

    http://ronaldthomaswest.com/2015/04/16/raphaels-paradox/

    ^

    The essence of Cultural Marxism is the destruction of the Western Christian tradition. Your attempt to deny the existence of Cultural Marxism in the same sentence where you espouse it marks you as the enemy of any person who values his or her freedom, or who values honest argumentation.

    Read More
  55. Great article, but, honestly, I’ve read the back-and-forth on this topic since it raised its ugly head a few weeks ago, and I’m sick of it! Yes, there’s a degree of educational value in this for some, whether Southerners or Yankees, but for many – including many commenters here, evidently – it’s useless.

    We Southerners can argue all day long about what our symbols, our history, and our heroes mean, but it will never matter to statists/cultural Marxists/neo-cons/progressives/corporacrats, etc. So here’s the bottom line up front: I DON’T CARE!

    I will continue to display my Battle Flag, my First National, my Bonnie Blue, or whatever, and I’ll do it with or without your approval! Keep telling me and mine we’re racists, homophobes, hayseed hicks; again, I DON’T CARE! As another writer, Fred Reed, wrote in his column a few weeks back, our Battle Flag has become the symbol for opposition to statism everywhere, North, South, East and West, and even includes folks of similar temperament overseas. We’re sick of having the so-called elites endlessly lecture us on what we ought to think, and we ain’t havin’ it!

    The battle lines are being drawn once again, and you statists are as of old the aggressors. By your overreach, you’ve actually sparked that much more opposition to your dreams of dominance, and you’re going to see Battle Flags (not to mention, I’ll wager, Gadsden and other flags of that ilk) springing up everywhere, not just here in Dixie!

    We’re done with you!

    Read More
  56. @Orville H. Larson
    Hell, you took the words right out of my mouth.

    "I wouldn't give a plug nickel for the so called sovereignty of the United States today. Our fecal government is an illegal abomination of what it was designed to be. It treats the Constitution like toilet paper. It assassinates American citizens without due process. It wages illegal wars of aggression . . . and mass murders and maims millions of innocents world wide. . . ."

    Can any discerning American dispute this? . . .

    Thanks,

    It’s well past time to dig the Confederate battle flag out of cobwebbed storage. Not as a symbol of Southern heritage, but as a symbol of American men and women today who will not be slaves. As a symbol of righteous and freedom in the face of tyranny and the treason of a corrupt and criminal and murderous central government.

    We need to declare secession today. First in our hearts and then on a broader scale.

    The enemy of the American people are not the Iraqis or the Syrians. It isn’t the Iranians or the Libyans. Our most intractable and committed enemy- who wants to enslave us and trample our rights and put bullets in us if we resist, is not Vladimir Putin or China or ISIS. No. The enemy of the United States constitution and the threats to the freedom of the American people are today the very treasonous scum who swore a sacred oath to protect that Constitution.

    Our enemy, the enemy of the American people are the people who voted to authorize the NDAA.

    The ones who vote to bomb countries and people who they know are innocent. Can you even imagine the evil that must lurk in the black heart of a politician who casts a vote to mass-murder innocent people based on known lies because they consider it politically expedient to do so? IOW for a handful of shekels?

    Our enemies are the treasonous scum who facilitate the fecal’s surveillance/police state spying on us. They are our enemies. They are not spying on you to keep you safe. They’re spying on you to keep you in chains. Chains that are forged in the moral cowardice of the American people’s missing character today. The most noble and honorable thing we Americans could do (of all races and creeds) would be to fly the Confederate flag of resistance to tyranny bold and proud, as never before. To demand that we are not party to mass murder and mindless destruction of other people’s countries because a hand full of rabid Zionists like Sheldon Adelson and Rupert Murdoch control our whore politicians.

    It’s way past time to say No! to all of this.

    It’s time to dig that flag out of storage and put it proudly on a pole. Today it says what the founders of this country were telling King George; that they would not be slaves to tyranny. Today it is the Confederate flag that stands for freedom, for honor, and for the inviolate dignity of the individual. Because it is the rebel flag of secession from and resistance to a government that has become an oppressor and has treasonously violated the covenant (the Constitution) between itself and the governed.

    What they are trying to do is to cow us all into obedience to their central memes. To their narratives that Americans are the ‘exceptional people’ so long as we’re willing to kill and die for Israel- thousands of miles away, but at home we are to walk with bowed head, ashamed of ourselves and who and what we are. I for one intend to tell them to pound sand. The jig is up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    The enemy of the American people are not the Iraqis or the Syrians. It isn’t the Iranians or the Libyans. Our most intractable and committed enemy- who wants to enslave us and trample our rights and put bullets in us if we resist, is not Vladimir Putin or China or ISIS. No. The enemy of the United States constitution and the threats to the freedom of the American people are today the very treasonous scum who swore a sacred oath to protect that Constitution.
     
    One million thumbs-up!
    , @SolontoCroesus
    who knows the sound of a million thumbs clapping?


    ---

    btw Rurik, I'm approaching the view that Germans felt pretty much the same way back in 1933.

    The hammer and sickle on a red field was attempting to supplant the German flag, much like what's going on in this image --- http://www.lobelog.com/aipac-and-its-better-iran-deal/

    The symbol-that-must-be-hated was specifically designed to mimic and recast and thereby declare defiance of an attempted Communist takeover of Germany.
  57. @Rurik
    Thanks,

    It's well past time to dig the Confederate battle flag out of cobwebbed storage. Not as a symbol of Southern heritage, but as a symbol of American men and women today who will not be slaves. As a symbol of righteous and freedom in the face of tyranny and the treason of a corrupt and criminal and murderous central government.

    We need to declare secession today. First in our hearts and then on a broader scale.

    The enemy of the American people are not the Iraqis or the Syrians. It isn't the Iranians or the Libyans. Our most intractable and committed enemy- who wants to enslave us and trample our rights and put bullets in us if we resist, is not Vladimir Putin or China or ISIS. No. The enemy of the United States constitution and the threats to the freedom of the American people are today the very treasonous scum who swore a sacred oath to protect that Constitution.

    Our enemy, the enemy of the American people are the people who voted to authorize the NDAA.

    The ones who vote to bomb countries and people who they know are innocent. Can you even imagine the evil that must lurk in the black heart of a politician who casts a vote to mass-murder innocent people based on known lies because they consider it politically expedient to do so? IOW for a handful of shekels?

    Our enemies are the treasonous scum who facilitate the fecal's surveillance/police state spying on us. They are our enemies. They are not spying on you to keep you safe. They're spying on you to keep you in chains. Chains that are forged in the moral cowardice of the American people's missing character today. The most noble and honorable thing we Americans could do (of all races and creeds) would be to fly the Confederate flag of resistance to tyranny bold and proud, as never before. To demand that we are not party to mass murder and mindless destruction of other people's countries because a hand full of rabid Zionists like Sheldon Adelson and Rupert Murdoch control our whore politicians.

    It's way past time to say No! to all of this.

    It's time to dig that flag out of storage and put it proudly on a pole. Today it says what the founders of this country were telling King George; that they would not be slaves to tyranny. Today it is the Confederate flag that stands for freedom, for honor, and for the inviolate dignity of the individual. Because it is the rebel flag of secession from and resistance to a government that has become an oppressor and has treasonously violated the covenant (the Constitution) between itself and the governed.

    What they are trying to do is to cow us all into obedience to their central memes. To their narratives that Americans are the 'exceptional people' so long as we're willing to kill and die for Israel- thousands of miles away, but at home we are to walk with bowed head, ashamed of ourselves and who and what we are. I for one intend to tell them to pound sand. The jig is up.

    The enemy of the American people are not the Iraqis or the Syrians. It isn’t the Iranians or the Libyans. Our most intractable and committed enemy- who wants to enslave us and trample our rights and put bullets in us if we resist, is not Vladimir Putin or China or ISIS. No. The enemy of the United States constitution and the threats to the freedom of the American people are today the very treasonous scum who swore a sacred oath to protect that Constitution.

    One million thumbs-up!

    Read More
  58. @Rurik
    Thanks,

    It's well past time to dig the Confederate battle flag out of cobwebbed storage. Not as a symbol of Southern heritage, but as a symbol of American men and women today who will not be slaves. As a symbol of righteous and freedom in the face of tyranny and the treason of a corrupt and criminal and murderous central government.

    We need to declare secession today. First in our hearts and then on a broader scale.

    The enemy of the American people are not the Iraqis or the Syrians. It isn't the Iranians or the Libyans. Our most intractable and committed enemy- who wants to enslave us and trample our rights and put bullets in us if we resist, is not Vladimir Putin or China or ISIS. No. The enemy of the United States constitution and the threats to the freedom of the American people are today the very treasonous scum who swore a sacred oath to protect that Constitution.

    Our enemy, the enemy of the American people are the people who voted to authorize the NDAA.

    The ones who vote to bomb countries and people who they know are innocent. Can you even imagine the evil that must lurk in the black heart of a politician who casts a vote to mass-murder innocent people based on known lies because they consider it politically expedient to do so? IOW for a handful of shekels?

    Our enemies are the treasonous scum who facilitate the fecal's surveillance/police state spying on us. They are our enemies. They are not spying on you to keep you safe. They're spying on you to keep you in chains. Chains that are forged in the moral cowardice of the American people's missing character today. The most noble and honorable thing we Americans could do (of all races and creeds) would be to fly the Confederate flag of resistance to tyranny bold and proud, as never before. To demand that we are not party to mass murder and mindless destruction of other people's countries because a hand full of rabid Zionists like Sheldon Adelson and Rupert Murdoch control our whore politicians.

    It's way past time to say No! to all of this.

    It's time to dig that flag out of storage and put it proudly on a pole. Today it says what the founders of this country were telling King George; that they would not be slaves to tyranny. Today it is the Confederate flag that stands for freedom, for honor, and for the inviolate dignity of the individual. Because it is the rebel flag of secession from and resistance to a government that has become an oppressor and has treasonously violated the covenant (the Constitution) between itself and the governed.

    What they are trying to do is to cow us all into obedience to their central memes. To their narratives that Americans are the 'exceptional people' so long as we're willing to kill and die for Israel- thousands of miles away, but at home we are to walk with bowed head, ashamed of ourselves and who and what we are. I for one intend to tell them to pound sand. The jig is up.

    who knows the sound of a million thumbs clapping?

    btw Rurik, I’m approaching the view that Germans felt pretty much the same way back in 1933.

    The hammer and sickle on a red field was attempting to supplant the German flag, much like what’s going on in this image — http://www.lobelog.com/aipac-and-its-better-iran-deal/

    The symbol-that-must-be-hated was specifically designed to mimic and recast and thereby declare defiance of an attempted Communist takeover of Germany.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    I’m approaching the view that Germans felt pretty much the same way back in 1933.
     
    Yea, only way worse

    America is only suffering a tiny fraction of the treachery, humiliations and horrors that Germany suffered, and for the exact same reasons and with the exact same methods. Just as Russians suffered the same thing.

    I think people make a mistake when they blame the Russians for Bolshevism or Americans for the 'war on terror' and all the other evils we're engaged in today. When that particular parasite seethes its way into your government and your institutions, eventually they become just as deadly to your own people as the ones they're putting in concentration camps (like the "Brits" did to the Boer's women and children in order to kill them off). Look at the Brits today.

    Anyways yep, the Germans did and do suffer for the affront of wanting to live in their own lands unmolested by people who used treachery and mass starvation to take over their country. And once they had it, they imposed a cruel ethnic and spiritual evisceration of the German people. IOW (to use the language of their tormentors)- they took a massive, steaming dump on everything the German people held sacred; their amazing heritage, their honor, their blood and their future. Just like what they're doing today to the rest of the dying (murdered) West.

    Today, ironically it seems we are forced to look to Putin and the East for any hope for the institutions and very people of the West.
  59. @Cesare
    What a load of crap. Secession was an illegal act against the sovereignty of the United states. The exact same kind of thing tinfoil hat types claim the UN is plotting. Lincoln was right to stop it with force; but he was careful to let the seditionists fire the first shots at fort Sumter to preclude the exact arguments lost causers would make.

    He issued the emancipation proclamation not out of desperation but on the heels of a major victory. He realized that to win the war, slavery had to be destroyed. There was no going back to the status quo ante bellum without the southern slave power holding sway over the federal government. The south had to be broken. It was the right thing to do and it was done for a myriad of reasons, none of them involving desperation.

    There was nothing honorable about the confederacy. Its legacy and symbols belong in a museum next to the history of slavery and racism. That's where they would be had northern political will not failed reconstruction, civil rights, and the national memory.

    Piss on Lincoln, that warmongering, statist, racist, Constitution-defiling scumbag. He set the stage for what we have today. And piss on his war crimes-committing commanders Grant, Sherman et al.

    Read More
  60. First, the demand was made that the Battle Flag needs to come down, that images of that flag need to be banned and suppressed, because, whatever its past may have been, it has now become in the current context a “symbol of hate” and “carried by racists,” that it “symbolizes racism.”

    Anyone with a clue, anywhere in the world, knows that’s a fact. It is really stupid to deny the obvious. You are not fooling anyone. It is also really stupid to equate the Confederate flag with the American flag just because a number of racial atrocities have been committed by people flying the Stars and Stripes. The Confederacy was akin to Nazi Germany, not the USA. Note how the two banners regularly displayed in the racist hate site Stormfront (founded by an ex-KKK leader from the South) are the Nazi and Confederate flags.

    Here is the raison d’etre of the Confederacy in the words of the Vice President of the Confederate States of America during the American Civil War:

    http://web.archive.org/web/20130822142313/http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/cornerstone-speech/

    The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization.

    The prevailing ideas entertained by him [Thomas Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time…Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the “storm came and the wind blew.”.

    Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

    Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature’s laws. With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system…… Our confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws. This stone which was rejected by the first builders “is become the chief of the corner” the real “corner-stone” in our new edifice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    The prevailing ideas entertained by him [Thomas Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time…Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races..."
     
    "It' didn't rest on the "assumption of the equality of races", but rather the fundamental right of all men, regardless of their respective abilities- to live free. IOW is was/is of no matter that they weren't equal in all things, it is the God given right of all men, no matter how unequal individually or racially, that they should be free.


    "Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free; nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion have drawn indelible lines of distinction between them." - Jefferson

    By the Orwellian standards of today, men like Lincoln or Jefferson before him were raging, half-baked racists of the worst order. Not only did they see the obvious differences in the temperaments, proclivities and abilities of the races, they didn't believe that the path to utopia and eternal, universal harmony was forced integration- like the recent 'disparate impact' agenda.

    Is it just possible that some of the rancor over race today in America (and the Confederate flag) is due to the fact that the simple, innocent observations of men like Lincoln and Jefferson regarding the races- would get you fired from any job of consequence were you to notice the same, glaringly obvious things, and mention them?

    Is it possible that even today, in our unique age of 'enlightenment', that men (black or white or otherwise) who don't want to be force-integrated- might resent the efforts of the fecal government to do so? And that rebel flag just might be a symbol of those, especially hated Southern, working class white folks, who tho they may have no animosity towards anyone of any race, don't feel that the only way forward is to see their ancestors maligned as vile racists, their communities transformed, their character and kin impugned as evil for the thought-crime of thinking nothing more than what Lincoln and Jefferson themselves both thought, that the races are different, and that they both thrive and are happiest when they're allowed to seek their own destiny in their own ways?
  61. Fred gave 4 points in defense:

    I. t was not the national flag of the Confederacy that flew over slavery, but, rather, was carried by soldiers, 90-plus per cent who did not own slaves (which was roughly comparable to percentages in various regiments of the Union army..
    But this is not true. In the years of fighting, the Confederate flag DID fly over slavery, and in defense of slavery. Almost every Southern Declaration of Secession mentions slavery as the primary “states right” at issue. And they went to war to keep slavery, and flew a flag, towards that end..

    .
    2. The Battle Flag was designed to represent the historic Celtic and Christian origin of many Southerners and served as a soldier’ flag.
    True as to some details of the layout, but again, it was flown in defense of the “state’s right” of slavery. And the battle Flag was not designed as any “cultural celebration”. It was a BATTLE Flag- designed to rally and inspire white troops to fight for slavery. Some say it was “states rights”. Well, what was the “states rights” at stake and under dispute? Slavery. No amount of “heritage” revisionism can get around this fact.

    .
    3. That is, those Southerners who took up arms in 1861 to defend their states, their homes, and their families, were engaged in “rebellion” and were “traitors” under Federal law.
    But the Confederate government was in secession of the legally constituted federal government, and as such, falls under almost every credible definition of “traitorous” used in the Western world. When the US broke away from England, the Americans were deemed “traitors.” The only reason Americans are not called “traitors” today, is because they won that war. Had they lost, the American rebels would simply been another n the long line of forgotten insurgents against the colonial overlord.

    Fred avoids this point instead switching quickly to the status of Robert E. Lee. But Lee formally resigning from the US Army does not make him any less of a traitor. He resigned from the Army but did not renounce his US citizenship. He then went and joined a movement in rebellion against the legally constituted government of the United States. “Treason” was specifically defined in constitutional documents – the only crime so defined. Article III Section 3 delineates treason as follows:

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

    ^^Under this constitutional definition, Robert E. Lee was a traitor.

    .
    4. And that brings us to point four: the right of secession and whether the actions of the Southern states, December 1860-May 1861, could be justified under the US Constitution.

    What Fred forgets to mention is that some southern states had threatened to secede long before the Civil War, over tariffs, and were barred from doing o under threat. Fred again avoids addressing this history. QUOTE:

    Southerners had also discussed secession in the nation’s early years, concerned over talk of abolishing slavery. But when push came to shove in 1832, it was not over slavery but tariffs. National tariffs were passed that protected Northern manufacturers but increased prices for manufactured goods purchased in the predominantly agricultural South, where the Tariff of 1828 was dubbed the “Tariff of Abominations.” The legislature of South Carolina declared the tariff acts of 1828 and 1832 were “unauthorized by the constitution of the United States” and voted them null, void and non-binding on the state.

    President Andrew Jackson responded with a Proclamation of Force, declaring, “I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one state, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed.” (Emphasis is Jackson’s). Congress authorized Jackson to use military force if necessary to enforce the law (every Southern senator walked out in protest before the vote was taken). That proved unnecessary, as a compromise tariff was approved, and South Carolina rescinded its Nullification Ordinance.”
    http://www.historynet.com/secession

    ^^Note: The man threatening force to prevent secession is not a weak “liberal” but right wing hero Andrew Jackson. Jackson said, and its worth repeating:

    “I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one state, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed.”

    In short, right wing hero Andrew Jackson himself rejected Southern “nullification” a doctrine which developed into one of the foundations of secession.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    You seem to be one of people that I often encounter on the internet, who can read through a well reasoned defense or apologetic with no more comprehension that a billy goat staring at a wrist watch. Let's consider your objections to the author's theses one by one:

    1. The Battle Flag flew over slavery. Well, so did the US flag, for nearly 80 years. The 13 stripe flag also flew over slave States like MO, KY, MD and DL for the entire course of the war. The US flag was displayed over these Union Slave States which were excluded from the Emancipation Proclamation and which retained slavery until the 13th amendment was ratified over 6 months following the close of the war. As far as the Secession Ordinances and Declarations of Causes, apparently you haven't bothered to read them. If you did, you may have noticed that only 4 of them (SC, GA, MS and TX) invoke slavery as a reason for secession and even in these cases, it's to note that the northern States failed to abide by their Constitutional duties under the fugitive slave laws and/or to simply note that slavery was a vital element of the social and economic order of the South.

    2. You then state that Battle Flag was designed to inspire Confederate soldiers to "fight for slavery". That would be a pretty impressive accomplishment for a flag over an army where ca. 90% of the soldiers didn't have slaves and had no prospect of ever having slaves. The Southern soldiers was sufficiently inspired to fight in defense of his home and family ; he didn't need a flag to compel him to take up arms against the invaders of his country.

    3. It is irrational and nescient to argue that Southern States were in rebellion or that Southerners were traitors. The original 13 States were recognized as separate, independent countries by the Crown in the Treaty of Paris, 1783. Some of these independent nations then joined in a confederated republic by ratifying the Constitution, except that two of them, NC and RI stayed out for 1 ½ years before joining, retaining their independence. Once the States resumed their lawful status as independent countries by withdrawing from the Union, they no longer had any legal obligations to the federal govt. Their situation was NOT like that of the Founding Fathers who actually were committing treason against the Crown. The federal govt was the creation of the States (as the author notes) and the State retained the right to belong or disassociate. You then claim that Gen. Lee failed to resign his US citizenship. Well, that would have been rather difficult because there was no such thing as US citizenship at the time. One was a citizen of one's State, and in Lee's case, that was VA. If one's State was in the federal Union, then one had status as a "citizen" of the US, but once your State left the Union, you no longer had any legal claim to citizenship.

    4. The author points out something that most people who are informed on this topic already know, i.e., that secession was a right almost universally held to exist in States of the North and the South. The New England States considered or threatened secession in 1803, 1807 and 1814 and again in 1845. Jefferson noted that some of the western States might want to secede and form a Mississippi Confederation, and if so, that was their right. In early 1861, hundreds of NORTHERN newspaper editorials reiterated the right of States to seceded. It is simply ignorant cant to try and claim that there was no right of secession under the Constitution, considering its nature and history of ratification
  62. @SolontoCroesus

    Why don’t you move forward and embrace the current flag of the USA??? And Hold your head high…..
     
    take a look at how the current flag of the USA looks in embrace


    ---

    look up some facts for a change.
    List of white nationalist organizations then come back to me and tell me America does not have a problem Americans are second to only Nazi Germany…..
     
    The Nazi SS had soldiers from all over the world, the most thoroughly integrated and superbly trained fighting force in history. Of course Germans had an ancient tradition of integrating its warriors: Germans were hi-performing elements of Roman fighting forces that included men from all over the Roman empire, from Britain to Egypt to the borders of Persia.

    USA, on the other hand, segregated its troops. When Black GIs returned home from WWII, they were denied the benefits of housing and education that white GIs received under the GI Bill. Black WWII veterans were lynched.

    Persistent resort to reductio ad Hitlerum and reductio ad Nazismus completely undermines credibility and reveals only ignorance and acquiescence to mob mentality.

    The Nazi SS had soldiers from all over the world, the most thoroughly integrated and superbly trained fighting force in history.

    Rather dubious. When did the Nazi SS ever have black soldiers for example? Or Chinese? lol

    And yes they were a solid well trained force, but who says they were the most “superbly trained fighting force in history”? The US Marines in WW2 are more than a match for the SS, and they proved themselves against some of the toughest opposition – the fanatical, suicidal Japanese of WW2. Oh and by the way the SS did pretty good against unarmed civilians- several hundreds of thousands of Jews. All that “superb training” must have come in handy in shooting children in the mass graves of Poland and the Ukraine for example. Its easy to be a tough guy when you attacking people that’s can’t shoot back. But when they met the American boys of the “Big Red One” for example, people who could actually shoot back, turns out they weren’t so tough.

    The Big Red One was a veteran of three amphibious assaults in North Africa, Sicily and Normandy. It had fought in deserts, mountains, plains and cities, in extreme heat and cold, against every kind of opponent. With 16 Medal of Honor recipients, the ‘”Big Red One” more than holds its own in comparisons.

    .
    USA, on the other hand, segregated its troops. When Black GIs returned home from WWII, they were denied the benefits of housing and education that white GIs received under the GI Bill. Black WWII veterans were lynched.
    True enough and in WW2 it is a little known fact that the German propaganda excoriated the US for preaching democracy abroad, while practicing segregation and disenfranchisement at home. But the SS was very much itself into segregation- certain “subhuman races” could not join. Somewere actually slated for extermination- the ultimate segregation sanction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    see in video at 2:18 (embed codes not supported on Unz, I guess)


    Black and Muslim Nazi SS Troops (1944)


    "Black and Muslim Nazi troops were prevalent in the Eastern Front in 1944, and according to historians they were treated better and respected more than black troops in the U.S army who could not eat in the same tables as whites or sleep in the same tents, black soldiers in the German Army were treated humanely and had all the rights given to white German soldiers.

    The German army was the most tolerant and multi-cultural army in Europe at that time, but 60 years of anti-German propaganda has made the world think otherwise. The winners re-wrote history on Nazi Germany and WW2."
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=426_1208106538#kmJhESQS2VPsIZSG.99

     

    , @Ron Unz
    I've noticed that you've been frequently changing your commenter handle over the last few weeks. It's obvious you're not trying to hide your identity (which would be a serious problem), but it's much better for everyone if you keep the same handle, presumably the original one you used, "Enrique Cardova."

    Are your changing names due to some sort of identity-authentication problem with the system? If you select a hidden email and keep using it, the system knows you are who you claim to keep, preventing someone hostile from false-flagging you. Your name and email can be saved in a cookie on your browser+device if you check the "Remember My Information" option when you leave a comment.
  63. @Sonic
    WorkingClass - you make some very good points. I'll only add that it is a bit more that 0.01%, and that there are many people (including from the working class) who blindly follow and support the elites responsible for the underlying ideologies that enable what you mentioned. The underlying ideologies that support Empire (such as American Exceptionalism and the belief that the US has a duty to spread its culture, way of life, and political ideologies throughout the world).

    Also, we must note that the slaughter of the Native Americans and race-based slavery for economic gain are things that occurred before the American Civil War and before the establishment of the Federal Reserve. We also need to consider the centuries of European colonialism whose affects are still being witnessed in the Middle East and Third World. The US war for independence was in fact, also a war against European colonialism (but in a different way). Racism as represented in European culture through such things as the "Manifest Destiny" policy, carried over into the culture and psyche of America (most of the 13 colonies were composed of people of European descent after all).

    This then may have played a role in America's domestic and foreign policies towards poor people of color at home (where they are the majority in various prison camps) and abroad (where most of the nations being bombed today are poor countries of people of color with rich resources). When trying to talk about this though, people tend to look for scapegoats or conspiracy theories while insisting on having unwavering pride and patriotism (whether to this flag or that)!

    Thank you for your reply. And yes the impulse to imperialism existed in the colonies from the beginning. The American apple could not fall far from the British tree. Yet the framers made an heroic attempt to break with the imperial past. I pick on Lincoln because he undid their work. The constitution, sans federalism, is already not the constitution.

    Read More
  64. @Enrique Cardova
    The Nazi SS had soldiers from all over the world, the most thoroughly integrated and superbly trained fighting force in history.

    Rather dubious. When did the Nazi SS ever have black soldiers for example? Or Chinese? lol


    And yes they were a solid well trained force, but who says they were the most "superbly trained fighting force in history"? The US Marines in WW2 are more than a match for the SS, and they proved themselves against some of the toughest opposition - the fanatical, suicidal Japanese of WW2. Oh and by the way the SS did pretty good against unarmed civilians- several hundreds of thousands of Jews. All that "superb training" must have come in handy in shooting children in the mass graves of Poland and the Ukraine for example. Its easy to be a tough guy when you attacking people that's can't shoot back. But when they met the American boys of the "Big Red One" for example, people who could actually shoot back, turns out they weren't so tough.

    The Big Red One was a veteran of three amphibious assaults in North Africa, Sicily and Normandy. It had fought in deserts, mountains, plains and cities, in extreme heat and cold, against every kind of opponent. With 16 Medal of Honor recipients, the '"Big Red One" more than holds its own in comparisons.

    .
    USA, on the other hand, segregated its troops. When Black GIs returned home from WWII, they were denied the benefits of housing and education that white GIs received under the GI Bill. Black WWII veterans were lynched.
    True enough and in WW2 it is a little known fact that the German propaganda excoriated the US for preaching democracy abroad, while practicing segregation and disenfranchisement at home. But the SS was very much itself into segregation- certain "subhuman races" could not join. Somewere actually slated for extermination- the ultimate segregation sanction.

    see in video at 2:18 (embed codes not supported on Unz, I guess)

    Black and Muslim Nazi SS Troops (1944)

    “Black and Muslim Nazi troops were prevalent in the Eastern Front in 1944, and according to historians they were treated better and respected more than black troops in the U.S army who could not eat in the same tables as whites or sleep in the same tents, black soldiers in the German Army were treated humanely and had all the rights given to white German soldiers.

    The German army was the most tolerant and multi-cultural army in Europe at that time, but 60 years of anti-German propaganda has made the world think otherwise. The winners re-wrote history on Nazi Germany and WW2.”

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=426_1208106538#kmJhESQS2VPsIZSG.99

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Solonto - I get the point your making (and thanks for conveying new information). At the same time, I have to state that Black or Muslim troops were a very very small portion of the Nazi army. For that matter, there were some Jews who were in the Nazi army and others who were allied with the Nazis...

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/museums/10682975/The-Jews-who-fought-for-Hitler-We-did-not-help-the-Germans.-We-had-a-common-enemy.html

    If those you mention were treated better than blacks in the American army...then it is because Germany was a bit less secular and less capitalistic as compared the US. The more secular a nation is, the more opportunity for racism and racist thought. Capitalism adds a toxic mix to that since money, wealth, and profit become the heart and soul of a capitalistic nation. This despite the fact that Christianity, Islam, and most eastern religions advocate against materialism and greed. The Jews were blamed for the economic collapse of Germany, and its losses in World War 1. Still, there wasn't a history within Germany for race-based slavery as there was in the US prior to World War 2 (so that is an important reason for the differences).

    Still, Germany has a long history as an imperial and colonial power. Today, Germany is following the US and NATO wherever they may go. While there is less racism or xenophobia in Europe as compared to the US...there is just as much Islamaphobia and anti-Semetism (which applies to both Jews and Arabs since both are Semites), if not more. And we know from the Holocaust and from the Serbian-lead genocide...what happens when racism goes unchecked on the European continent.
  65. @Enrique Cardova
    The Nazi SS had soldiers from all over the world, the most thoroughly integrated and superbly trained fighting force in history.

    Rather dubious. When did the Nazi SS ever have black soldiers for example? Or Chinese? lol


    And yes they were a solid well trained force, but who says they were the most "superbly trained fighting force in history"? The US Marines in WW2 are more than a match for the SS, and they proved themselves against some of the toughest opposition - the fanatical, suicidal Japanese of WW2. Oh and by the way the SS did pretty good against unarmed civilians- several hundreds of thousands of Jews. All that "superb training" must have come in handy in shooting children in the mass graves of Poland and the Ukraine for example. Its easy to be a tough guy when you attacking people that's can't shoot back. But when they met the American boys of the "Big Red One" for example, people who could actually shoot back, turns out they weren't so tough.

    The Big Red One was a veteran of three amphibious assaults in North Africa, Sicily and Normandy. It had fought in deserts, mountains, plains and cities, in extreme heat and cold, against every kind of opponent. With 16 Medal of Honor recipients, the '"Big Red One" more than holds its own in comparisons.

    .
    USA, on the other hand, segregated its troops. When Black GIs returned home from WWII, they were denied the benefits of housing and education that white GIs received under the GI Bill. Black WWII veterans were lynched.
    True enough and in WW2 it is a little known fact that the German propaganda excoriated the US for preaching democracy abroad, while practicing segregation and disenfranchisement at home. But the SS was very much itself into segregation- certain "subhuman races" could not join. Somewere actually slated for extermination- the ultimate segregation sanction.

    I’ve noticed that you’ve been frequently changing your commenter handle over the last few weeks. It’s obvious you’re not trying to hide your identity (which would be a serious problem), but it’s much better for everyone if you keep the same handle, presumably the original one you used, “Enrique Cardova.”

    Are your changing names due to some sort of identity-authentication problem with the system? If you select a hidden email and keep using it, the system knows you are who you claim to keep, preventing someone hostile from false-flagging you. Your name and email can be saved in a cookie on your browser+device if you check the “Remember My Information” option when you leave a comment.

    Read More
  66. […] discovered this reading a piece by Boyd Cathey where he discusses the controversy surrounding the Battle Flag and delves into Civil War […]

    Read More
  67. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    A lot of recycled Williams, Clyde Wilson, Thomas Woods, diLorenzo and etc
    I guess if I want to read stuff by Jaffa or Mansfield, I’ll have go elsewhere
    Your article is stuffed full of Southern interpretations, assertions,so called facts, and I have read several of the works of the above named authors who preach, “The South was Right” (the Kennedys book) and found them all wanting, to include the Freeman works on Lee.
    This flag business reminds me that at the Normandy beaches and cemetary, the only participating national flag missing is the German. Perhaps after a time, after the Gettysburg Address is read for what it was, a Union only commemoration, then the Confederate monuments and flags will come down.
    And maybe not as Napoleon’s flags and monuments are still there at Waterloo
    and who can argue that he was no tyrant. Indeed, while we didn’t side with the UK during Napoleon, we did side with those imperialists later. Both of them.

    Read More
  68. @WorkingClass
    @Sonic

    Thank you for your reply. And yes the impulse to imperialism existed in the colonies from the beginning. The American apple could not fall far from the British tree. Yet the framers made an heroic attempt to break with the imperial past. I pick on Lincoln because he undid their work. The constitution, sans federalism, is already not the constitution.

    WorkingClass – well said.

    Read More
  69. @SolontoCroesus
    see in video at 2:18 (embed codes not supported on Unz, I guess)


    Black and Muslim Nazi SS Troops (1944)


    "Black and Muslim Nazi troops were prevalent in the Eastern Front in 1944, and according to historians they were treated better and respected more than black troops in the U.S army who could not eat in the same tables as whites or sleep in the same tents, black soldiers in the German Army were treated humanely and had all the rights given to white German soldiers.

    The German army was the most tolerant and multi-cultural army in Europe at that time, but 60 years of anti-German propaganda has made the world think otherwise. The winners re-wrote history on Nazi Germany and WW2."
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=426_1208106538#kmJhESQS2VPsIZSG.99

     

    Solonto – I get the point your making (and thanks for conveying new information). At the same time, I have to state that Black or Muslim troops were a very very small portion of the Nazi army. For that matter, there were some Jews who were in the Nazi army and others who were allied with the Nazis…

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/museums/10682975/The-Jews-who-fought-for-Hitler-We-did-not-help-the-Germans.-We-had-a-common-enemy.html

    If those you mention were treated better than blacks in the American army…then it is because Germany was a bit less secular and less capitalistic as compared the US. The more secular a nation is, the more opportunity for racism and racist thought. Capitalism adds a toxic mix to that since money, wealth, and profit become the heart and soul of a capitalistic nation. This despite the fact that Christianity, Islam, and most eastern religions advocate against materialism and greed. The Jews were blamed for the economic collapse of Germany, and its losses in World War 1. Still, there wasn’t a history within Germany for race-based slavery as there was in the US prior to World War 2 (so that is an important reason for the differences).

    Still, Germany has a long history as an imperial and colonial power. Today, Germany is following the US and NATO wherever they may go. While there is less racism or xenophobia in Europe as compared to the US…there is just as much Islamaphobia and anti-Semetism (which applies to both Jews and Arabs since both are Semites), if not more. And we know from the Holocaust and from the Serbian-lead genocide…what happens when racism goes unchecked on the European continent.

    Read More
  70. @SolontoCroesus
    who knows the sound of a million thumbs clapping?


    ---

    btw Rurik, I'm approaching the view that Germans felt pretty much the same way back in 1933.

    The hammer and sickle on a red field was attempting to supplant the German flag, much like what's going on in this image --- http://www.lobelog.com/aipac-and-its-better-iran-deal/

    The symbol-that-must-be-hated was specifically designed to mimic and recast and thereby declare defiance of an attempted Communist takeover of Germany.

    I’m approaching the view that Germans felt pretty much the same way back in 1933.

    Yea, only way worse

    America is only suffering a tiny fraction of the treachery, humiliations and horrors that Germany suffered, and for the exact same reasons and with the exact same methods. Just as Russians suffered the same thing.

    I think people make a mistake when they blame the Russians for Bolshevism or Americans for the ‘war on terror’ and all the other evils we’re engaged in today. When that particular parasite seethes its way into your government and your institutions, eventually they become just as deadly to your own people as the ones they’re putting in concentration camps (like the “Brits” did to the Boer’s women and children in order to kill them off). Look at the Brits today.

    Anyways yep, the Germans did and do suffer for the affront of wanting to live in their own lands unmolested by people who used treachery and mass starvation to take over their country. And once they had it, they imposed a cruel ethnic and spiritual evisceration of the German people. IOW (to use the language of their tormentors)- they took a massive, steaming dump on everything the German people held sacred; their amazing heritage, their honor, their blood and their future. Just like what they’re doing today to the rest of the dying (murdered) West.

    Today, ironically it seems we are forced to look to Putin and the East for any hope for the institutions and very people of the West.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Rurik - you mean this Putin...

    http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer3/2012/06/26/4006445/7_wa.jpg
  71. @Bliss

    First, the demand was made that the Battle Flag needs to come down, that images of that flag need to be banned and suppressed, because, whatever its past may have been, it has now become in the current context a “symbol of hate” and “carried by racists,” that it “symbolizes racism.”
     
    Anyone with a clue, anywhere in the world, knows that's a fact. It is really stupid to deny the obvious. You are not fooling anyone. It is also really stupid to equate the Confederate flag with the American flag just because a number of racial atrocities have been committed by people flying the Stars and Stripes. The Confederacy was akin to Nazi Germany, not the USA. Note how the two banners regularly displayed in the racist hate site Stormfront (founded by an ex-KKK leader from the South) are the Nazi and Confederate flags.

    Here is the raison d'etre of the Confederacy in the words of the Vice President of the Confederate States of America during the American Civil War:

    http://web.archive.org/web/20130822142313/http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/cornerstone-speech/


    The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization.

    The prevailing ideas entertained by him [Thomas Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time...Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the “storm came and the wind blew.”.

    Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

    Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature’s laws. With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system...... Our confederacy is founded upon principles in strict conformity with these laws. This stone which was rejected by the first builders “is become the chief of the corner” the real “corner-stone” in our new edifice.

    The prevailing ideas entertained by him [Thomas Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time…Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races…”

    “It’ didn’t rest on the “assumption of the equality of races”, but rather the fundamental right of all men, regardless of their respective abilities- to live free. IOW is was/is of no matter that they weren’t equal in all things, it is the God given right of all men, no matter how unequal individually or racially, that they should be free.

    “Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free; nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion have drawn indelible lines of distinction between them.” - Jefferson

    By the Orwellian standards of today, men like Lincoln or Jefferson before him were raging, half-baked racists of the worst order. Not only did they see the obvious differences in the temperaments, proclivities and abilities of the races, they didn’t believe that the path to utopia and eternal, universal harmony was forced integration- like the recent ‘disparate impact’ agenda.

    Is it just possible that some of the rancor over race today in America (and the Confederate flag) is due to the fact that the simple, innocent observations of men like Lincoln and Jefferson regarding the races- would get you fired from any job of consequence were you to notice the same, glaringly obvious things, and mention them?

    Is it possible that even today, in our unique age of ‘enlightenment’, that men (black or white or otherwise) who don’t want to be force-integrated- might resent the efforts of the fecal government to do so? And that rebel flag just might be a symbol of those, especially hated Southern, working class white folks, who tho they may have no animosity towards anyone of any race, don’t feel that the only way forward is to see their ancestors maligned as vile racists, their communities transformed, their character and kin impugned as evil for the thought-crime of thinking nothing more than what Lincoln and Jefferson themselves both thought, that the races are different, and that they both thrive and are happiest when they’re allowed to seek their own destiny in their own ways?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    And that rebel flag just might be a symbol of those, especially hated Southern, working class white folks, who tho they may have no animosity towards anyone of any race,
     
    How can you say that with a straight face? Their words and actions loudly announce their racial animosities to the whole world.

    If you fly the confederate or nazi flags you are proudly telling the world that you agree with the founding principles of the Confederacy or the Third Reich. So don't act surprised when there is a hostile reaction from those who deem those principles to be evil.

    As for Thomas Jefferson, he had a sexual affair and 4 children with his black slave Sally Hemings. He translated a book of his good friend Count Volney the french philosopher, historian, abolitionist who espoused views that would be called afrocentrist today:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_Fran%C3%A7ois_de_Chasseb%C5%93uf,_comte_de_Volney

    What does that tell you?




    And as for Abraham Lincoln, isn't he the arch enemy to you confederate flag wavers? It must really burn you up inside to see how mainstream America considers him the greatest of all the Presidents. Well, he sure didn't look like a WASP did he? That's because he must have had some african and some native american ancestors. Likely, he was a melungeon:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=melungeon&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=595&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMIt5eEyt2OxwIV0TiICh0Seg-a
  72. @Rurik

    I’m approaching the view that Germans felt pretty much the same way back in 1933.
     
    Yea, only way worse

    America is only suffering a tiny fraction of the treachery, humiliations and horrors that Germany suffered, and for the exact same reasons and with the exact same methods. Just as Russians suffered the same thing.

    I think people make a mistake when they blame the Russians for Bolshevism or Americans for the 'war on terror' and all the other evils we're engaged in today. When that particular parasite seethes its way into your government and your institutions, eventually they become just as deadly to your own people as the ones they're putting in concentration camps (like the "Brits" did to the Boer's women and children in order to kill them off). Look at the Brits today.

    Anyways yep, the Germans did and do suffer for the affront of wanting to live in their own lands unmolested by people who used treachery and mass starvation to take over their country. And once they had it, they imposed a cruel ethnic and spiritual evisceration of the German people. IOW (to use the language of their tormentors)- they took a massive, steaming dump on everything the German people held sacred; their amazing heritage, their honor, their blood and their future. Just like what they're doing today to the rest of the dying (murdered) West.

    Today, ironically it seems we are forced to look to Putin and the East for any hope for the institutions and very people of the West.
    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik
    Sure

    I would put one of those things on too under appropriate circumstances.

    Showing respect to Judaism or Islam or any other religion is harmless in and of itself. Putin has many Jewish friends and allies. There is nothing wrong with Judaism or tolerance per se. It is when you're willing to put the interests of Zionism before the interests of your own country and people that it becomes an act of unspeakable treason. It seems to me that Putin has never and would never put anyone's interests above that of Russia and the Russian people. yarmulke or no yarmulke

    Can you say the same thing about any other western leader?
  73. @Sonic
    Rurik - you mean this Putin...

    http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer3/2012/06/26/4006445/7_wa.jpg

    Sure

    I would put one of those things on too under appropriate circumstances.

    Showing respect to Judaism or Islam or any other religion is harmless in and of itself. Putin has many Jewish friends and allies. There is nothing wrong with Judaism or tolerance per se. It is when you’re willing to put the interests of Zionism before the interests of your own country and people that it becomes an act of unspeakable treason. It seems to me that Putin has never and would never put anyone’s interests above that of Russia and the Russian people. yarmulke or no yarmulke

    Can you say the same thing about any other western leader?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Rurik - A fair point in and of itself, but not in the context of your previous comments nor in the context of various conspiracy theories that are conveyed on these forums and elsewhere (particularly in regards to those who identify with ethnic separatism or those who say that western civilization is dying because of non-white immigration and so forth). And in the rest of my comments below, I will also be addressing those who hold such conspiratorial views and as such, not everything may apply specifically to your views or comments.

    If Jews are partly or fully responsible for the destruction of western civilization many on here claim...then there is no way that Putin can be the last defender of western civilization while at the same time having friendly relations with the state of Israel. The state of Israel is a Zionist state. Many Jews oppose Zionism...and had Putin gone to meet with those particular Jews (such as the Jews against Zionism group as one example), then I would agree with your assertion. But the picture above is from a visit with Israeli leaders which Putin has met with many times. Not to mention that Russia is a member of the UN and recognizes the Zionist state. I agree with what you said about Judaism...but that has nothing to do with what Putin is really doing. More to the point, even if he does not put Zionist interests above Russian interests...he may still put the interests of various lobbies and elites in Russia above those of his own people. What have the children of Syria or Iraq or Afghanistan done to the people of Russia that allows Putin and those before him to support their destruction and annihilation at the hands of dictatorships?

    Those parties that Russia arms and trains (namely Iran and its proxies like Assad and Hezbullah) talk a lot about opposing Israel and liberating Palestine. But in reality, it is all talk. They only look out for their own interests and are completely unable to overthrow the Zionist regime or counter its influence in global politics and finance. Putin is the same way. He looks out for Russia only (as you stated). That is very different from being some sort of hope for the west or western civilization and culture. Surely you don't think that western civilization is bound to any one nation-state? But there are shades of imperialism in contemporary Russian policy which take us back to the days of the Soviet Empire and its global crusade for power and communism. If you think about it, an economic system with a central decision maker is much more dangerous as compared to a handful of powerful corporations that arise from capitalism...particularly when such a system aspires to become global and dominate the whole world.

    The reality of western civilization is largely a myth. Part of western power and success comes from its diversity both in terms of immigration as well as friends and allies from other states. The other aspect of the contemporary success of the west comes from all the nations it has conquered or defeated and the spoils of war that come from that. Still, the valiant Afghan people have proven that it is possible to resist both the Russia and the US along with their various allies around the world.

    No matter who you want to blame as being in control of the western world today, or no matter who you want to blame for having infiltrated it...the other reality is that the western world has never really been united (just like the current Muslim world). It has either been fighting against itself, or exporting its violence and conflict throughout the world (often under the guise of wanting to spread western cultural values). The United Nations in reality, is dominated by western nations. The structure, organization, policies, and values of the UN are a reflection of western roots. If you said that the Eastern Orthodox Church is a hope for Western Protestants, Evangelicals, and Christian Zionists...then maybe that would make sense. But Western Civilization is actually a very diverse civilization that means different things to different people. There will always be differences of opinion and internal conflict within the west as it pertains to secularism vs. the Christian majority, capitalism vs. socialism or communism, republic vs. empire, non-intervention vs. intervention, and so on. The wars that originated from Europe (and thus, western civilization) such as the two world wars and thereafter, the cold war (though in this case, the fighting was indirect and through third world proxies) shows just how bloody western civilization can be! Like the article of this thread (which highlights cultural marxism), we need not look for a scapegoat in order to explain away everything.

    If you want to say that the causes were because of the infiltration of this group or that, then you need to also critique the underlying system of western civilization that allowed such infiltration in the first place. Today, both Russia and the West are competing with one another for influence in the Middle East (backing different sides of the war there) and conflict between them has restarted. Because of their wars and war crimes in the Muslim world both the US and Russia have to varying degrees established security/police states within their own borders. You can't fight a war against "terrorism" and still have liberty or an open and free society (which most would agree are hallmarks of western civilization, at least in theory). If one analyzes the conduct of both Russia and the US in terms of their federalism, foreign policies (aside from the fact that they often support opposite sides), intervention, weapons sales, support for dictators, participation in the UN, domestic intelligence services, and transfer of wealth to the elites (corporatocracy on the western side, oligarchy on the russian side)...it becomes clear that they are both two sides of the same coin!!

    I'm quite certain however that Islam will continue to spread and the number of converts/reverts will continue to increase in both Russia as well as the West. This is because Islam (in its pristine form) gives mankind a way out of the darkness of racism, ethnic superiority, ethnic separatism, ethnic pride, overindulgence in the pride of one's heritage, worship of an economic system, nationalism, and so forth. All of mankind is from Adam and Eve. They were not westerners or easterners, nor capitalists or communists. And remember the example of Prophet Abraham (as) and the religion he followed. Abraham (as) was neither a Jew nor a Christian.

  74. @Rurik
    Sure

    I would put one of those things on too under appropriate circumstances.

    Showing respect to Judaism or Islam or any other religion is harmless in and of itself. Putin has many Jewish friends and allies. There is nothing wrong with Judaism or tolerance per se. It is when you're willing to put the interests of Zionism before the interests of your own country and people that it becomes an act of unspeakable treason. It seems to me that Putin has never and would never put anyone's interests above that of Russia and the Russian people. yarmulke or no yarmulke

    Can you say the same thing about any other western leader?

    Rurik – A fair point in and of itself, but not in the context of your previous comments nor in the context of various conspiracy theories that are conveyed on these forums and elsewhere (particularly in regards to those who identify with ethnic separatism or those who say that western civilization is dying because of non-white immigration and so forth). And in the rest of my comments below, I will also be addressing those who hold such conspiratorial views and as such, not everything may apply specifically to your views or comments.

    If Jews are partly or fully responsible for the destruction of western civilization many on here claim…then there is no way that Putin can be the last defender of western civilization while at the same time having friendly relations with the state of Israel. The state of Israel is a Zionist state. Many Jews oppose Zionism…and had Putin gone to meet with those particular Jews (such as the Jews against Zionism group as one example), then I would agree with your assertion. But the picture above is from a visit with Israeli leaders which Putin has met with many times. Not to mention that Russia is a member of the UN and recognizes the Zionist state. I agree with what you said about Judaism…but that has nothing to do with what Putin is really doing. More to the point, even if he does not put Zionist interests above Russian interests…he may still put the interests of various lobbies and elites in Russia above those of his own people. What have the children of Syria or Iraq or Afghanistan done to the people of Russia that allows Putin and those before him to support their destruction and annihilation at the hands of dictatorships?

    Those parties that Russia arms and trains (namely Iran and its proxies like Assad and Hezbullah) talk a lot about opposing Israel and liberating Palestine. But in reality, it is all talk. They only look out for their own interests and are completely unable to overthrow the Zionist regime or counter its influence in global politics and finance. Putin is the same way. He looks out for Russia only (as you stated). That is very different from being some sort of hope for the west or western civilization and culture. Surely you don’t think that western civilization is bound to any one nation-state? But there are shades of imperialism in contemporary Russian policy which take us back to the days of the Soviet Empire and its global crusade for power and communism. If you think about it, an economic system with a central decision maker is much more dangerous as compared to a handful of powerful corporations that arise from capitalism…particularly when such a system aspires to become global and dominate the whole world.

    The reality of western civilization is largely a myth. Part of western power and success comes from its diversity both in terms of immigration as well as friends and allies from other states. The other aspect of the contemporary success of the west comes from all the nations it has conquered or defeated and the spoils of war that come from that. Still, the valiant Afghan people have proven that it is possible to resist both the Russia and the US along with their various allies around the world.

    No matter who you want to blame as being in control of the western world today, or no matter who you want to blame for having infiltrated it…the other reality is that the western world has never really been united (just like the current Muslim world). It has either been fighting against itself, or exporting its violence and conflict throughout the world (often under the guise of wanting to spread western cultural values). The United Nations in reality, is dominated by western nations. The structure, organization, policies, and values of the UN are a reflection of western roots. If you said that the Eastern Orthodox Church is a hope for Western Protestants, Evangelicals, and Christian Zionists…then maybe that would make sense. But Western Civilization is actually a very diverse civilization that means different things to different people. There will always be differences of opinion and internal conflict within the west as it pertains to secularism vs. the Christian majority, capitalism vs. socialism or communism, republic vs. empire, non-intervention vs. intervention, and so on. The wars that originated from Europe (and thus, western civilization) such as the two world wars and thereafter, the cold war (though in this case, the fighting was indirect and through third world proxies) shows just how bloody western civilization can be! Like the article of this thread (which highlights cultural marxism), we need not look for a scapegoat in order to explain away everything.

    If you want to say that the causes were because of the infiltration of this group or that, then you need to also critique the underlying system of western civilization that allowed such infiltration in the first place. Today, both Russia and the West are competing with one another for influence in the Middle East (backing different sides of the war there) and conflict between them has restarted. Because of their wars and war crimes in the Muslim world both the US and Russia have to varying degrees established security/police states within their own borders. You can’t fight a war against “terrorism” and still have liberty or an open and free society (which most would agree are hallmarks of western civilization, at least in theory). If one analyzes the conduct of both Russia and the US in terms of their federalism, foreign policies (aside from the fact that they often support opposite sides), intervention, weapons sales, support for dictators, participation in the UN, domestic intelligence services, and transfer of wealth to the elites (corporatocracy on the western side, oligarchy on the russian side)…it becomes clear that they are both two sides of the same coin!!

    I’m quite certain however that Islam will continue to spread and the number of converts/reverts will continue to increase in both Russia as well as the West. This is because Islam (in its pristine form) gives mankind a way out of the darkness of racism, ethnic superiority, ethnic separatism, ethnic pride, overindulgence in the pride of one’s heritage, worship of an economic system, nationalism, and so forth. All of mankind is from Adam and Eve. They were not westerners or easterners, nor capitalists or communists. And remember the example of Prophet Abraham (as) and the religion he followed. Abraham (as) was neither a Jew nor a Christian.

    Read More
  75. If Jews are partly or fully responsible for the destruction of western civilization many on here claim…then there is no way that Putin can be the last defender of western civilization while at the same time having friendly relations with the state of Israel

    First off, Jews who are hostile to Western civilization (and they are legion) are not necessarily Israelis or even Zionists, per se. There is some overlapping to be sure, but one does not equal the other. And Putin is not (yet) the ‘last defender of Western civilization’. He just looks like the last best hope today, in light of what pathetic cretins we have as ‘leaders’. There still is some hope for Europe to turn things around. The Germans are losing all respect for their media and government. The British want out of Rothschild’s EU. The Greeks almost were, and could have been a first domino of sorts. There’s all kinds of possibilities today. But yes, Putin alone seems to have the brains and the nads to be the kind of leader we all need. As for his playing footsie with Bibi, that’s just realism. Israel is a fact on the ground. It would be silly and foolish not to recognize reality.

    he may still put the interests of various lobbies and elites in Russia above those of his own people. What have the children of Syria or Iraq or Afghanistan done to the people of Russia that allows Putin and those before him to support their destruction and annihilation at the hands of dictatorships?

    He inherited the looted country and the oligarchs who had looted it. There again, facts on the ground. How many leaders of which countries do you know who could have had the balls to imprison Rothschild stooge Khodorkovsky? He put that snake in hard labor for a decade or so. Talk about a mini Holocaust in and of itself. He has reined in most of the worst uber-criminals. Berezovsky is rotting in hell. The Russian middle class is ascendant and the Russian people have something ineffable, hope for the future and pride in being Russian again. After sixty years of Jewish commie slavery and genocide, followed by the looting of the country and a plunge into abject poverty and despair, alcoholism, drug addiction and AIDs, look at them now. That is the work of Putin my friend. Does he have a long way to go? Of course. But considering what Yeltsin (and Rothschild) left him, he’s performed a miracle.

    As for the war on terror, that too was something he understands. He’s having to deal with (real) Muslim terrorists from Chechnya. Scum who gas children. So when 911 happened, it caught us all off guard. Myself included. I figured it was Islamic extremists. They certainly have an axe to grind, so why not? But now that we all know 911 was an inside job, and that the wars on innocent countries like Iraq and Afghanistan were the work of international criminals, who was it that put the stops on the full on destruction of Syria? Putin, that’s who. Basically he said they duped him with their lies about humanitarian bombing of Libya, and that he wouldn’t be duped again. This is the whole reason they’re attacking him and all the lies about MH17 and the bombing of civilians in Ukraine, because they want to rope a dope Putin into a disastrous war with Europe. That way all kinds of white Christians get slaughtered and the Zionists laugh their chubby arses off. But Putin has not played ball with the snakes.

    Those parties that Russia arms and trains (namely Iran and its proxies like Assad and Hezbullah) talk a lot about opposing Israel and liberating Palestine. But in reality, it is all talk. They only look out for their own interests and are completely unable to overthrow the Zionist regime or counter its influence in global politics and finance.

    any more than you or I can. It doesn’t mean we have to like it.

    Putin is the same way. He looks out for Russia only (as you stated). That is very different from being some sort of hope for the west or western civilization and culture.

    I feel the same way about Iceland. In and of themselves, they’re no long term hope for the survival of Western civilization and its people at all. But by example, like Putin they are showing the rest of us the way, if we will only pay attention.

    But there are shades of imperialism in contemporary Russian policy which take us back to the days of the Soviet Empire and its global crusade for power and communism.

    I see exactly none of this. This sounds like the hysterics of our controlled media and whore politicians. Are you talking about Crimea? Ukraine? Don’t you know these conflicts, just like all the other non-conflicts in the Balkans and elsewhere are the work of festering boils on the body politic like the Kagan Crime Family Inc.? All those insidious “western” NGOs operating over there to undermine the Russian resurgence and return it to international banker domination and exploitation? Come on!

    If you think about it, an economic system with a central decision maker is much more dangerous as compared to a handful of powerful corporations that arise from capitalism…particularly when such a system aspires to become global and dominate the whole world.

    the former or the later?

    it is human nature to want to dominate. What we should aspire to is a system of checks and balances. Globalism is a kleptocracy of theft and enslavement of the individual to the crony-capitalist banksters and their assorted whores. I’d put my trust in Iceland and Putin, democracy and autocratic rule respectively far more sanguinely than I’d trust the bankers and their political whores. That’s pretty much exactly what gave us the horrors of the last century. And their progeny is drooling to get the war pigs in action once again. Just look at what they’re doing the world over. It isn’t Putin and his “imperialism” that are bombing and destroying countries right and left, its the occupied west that is doing that. Does Putin run a torture camp? Does he force feed prisoners who just want to die with hoses jammed up their asses? No, that is the work of crony capitalist, bankster fiends. Us in the former and dying west. Not Putin’s Russia. By their deeds you shall know them.

    The reality of western civilization is largely a myth.

    um.. Bullshit

    Part of western power and success comes from its diversity both in terms of immigration as well as friends and allies from other states.

    once yes, when the immigrants were European. Today that is the mantra of the destroyers of Western civilization. ; )

    The other aspect of the contemporary success of the west comes from all the nations it has conquered or defeated and the spoils of war that come from that.

    is that the secret of Switzerland’s success? Ireland? Canada? Finland? Perhaps that’s the secret of Belgium’s or Hungary or Austria’s success, that they looted from Africa and Asia all that they have. They built nothing, but stole it all from blacks who had created everything of consequence including civilization itself? Are you an American university professor? Perhaps a recent graduate?

    Still, the valiant Afghan people have proven that it is possible to resist both the Russia and the US along with their various allies around the world

    I don’t know how “valiant” they are, but I do admire the way they destroy empires and wannabe emperors. As for some of their other customs, not so much.

    It has either been fighting against itself, or exporting its violence and conflict throughout the world (often under the guise of wanting to spread western cultural values).

    It’s true that out of the vanity and arrogance of inbred European monarchs, too often brother was forced to fight brother. But until the last century, the European wars were mostly fought by monarchs using young men as their belligerents when they weren’t fighting invading Muslim hoards or Mongols. It was in the last century, when the international bankers at the Federal Reserve and their politician stooges took over the reins of the West that wars were fought on the civilian populations.

    shows just how bloody western civilization can be!

    when it is subverted and perverted by fiends to their own nefarious ends. Western civilization is in fact a good idea. It means the rule of law. It means the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment. It means the Magna Carta and the concept of democracy. It means reason and an exaltation of the human spirit in high art. It means a respect for the mind of man. It means above all, human freedom. These are good things. And worth preserving.

    If you want to say that the causes were because of the infiltration of this group or that, then you need to also critique the underlying system of western civilization that allowed such infiltration in the first place.

    you sound like that guy in the movie No Country for Old Men, when Anton Chigurh asks Woody: “let me ask you something. If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?”

    good question. Only Western civilization isn’t quite yet at the point where it has a shotgun pointed at its heart by a bankster, racial supremacist psychopath who has every intention of shooting. At least not quite yet anyways.

    Because of their wars and war crimes in the Muslim world both the US and Russia

    the war crimes the “west” are committing in the Muslim world are on behalf of Zionists and to the detriment of the people of the west, who die in these contrived wars for Israel and bankrupt their future to international banksters/war pigs. For the record.

    both the US and Russia have to varying degrees established security/police states within their own borders.

    the police state in the US is a direct consequence of the Mossad’s 911 and their agenda of turning us all into Palestinians.

    You can’t fight a war against “terrorism” and still have liberty or an open and free society (which most would agree are hallmarks of western civilization, at least in theory).

    Very good! You sound like me now.

    transfer of wealth to the elites (corporatocracy on the western side, oligarchy on the russian side)…it becomes clear that they are both two sides of the same coin!!

    No, they used to be. They both existed for the sake and glory of a tiny hand full of corrupt banksters and their stooges. But Putin changed all that. It is in Putin’s Russia that the middle class is ascendant, where as the opposite is the case of the occupied west. That’s just one more reason they hate Putin and want him dead.

    Islam (in its pristine form) gives mankind a way out of the darkness

    yea, right

    another stone age religion is what we in the west need. Keep your doctrins and dogmas and honor killings and clitorectamies and head slicing please. We don’t need it or want it. We see how much tolerance there is in Islam as they butcher Christians and rape western school girls in England and Norway and everywhere else they congregate. Keep it, thankyouvery much. We’ve had our full of Muslim ‘tolerance’.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_Tower

    We in the West know all about it.

    In your own lands, we should leave you unmolested to live your lives and worship your God and raise your families. We should trade goods and knowledge and culture where we both prosper in the exchange. Mutual respect of each others cultures is the ticket, and an iron respect for self-determination.

    It is a thread all into itself. But on this one we covered a lot of bases. Sometimes when we bit off too much at one time, we don’t get into the nitty-gritty quite as well as we could.

    Still, it was fun ; )

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Rurik – When you fall down as hard as Russia did, the only way to go is up. As long as Russia keeps to herself and doesn’t involve itself in the affairs of others…they most certainly will improve things for their country. Again, Putin is not a hero nor a defender of western civilization. You mention Chechnya, but the reality is that all of the Caucasian and Central Asian republics were a part of the Soviet Empire, and this is the root cause of the problem. The people of Chechnya, Dagestan, and all the surrounding areas want full and complete independence from Russia. Russia needs to stay out of these regions (they can secure their borders) just as the US needs to stay out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Muslim countries. This is an example of Putin following in the footsteps of his Soviet predecessors…not doing the opposite.

    Your justification for Putin’s actions in Syria is no different than those who justify American actions in Saudi Arabia or the other GCC nations. Both the US and Russia are supporting criminal tyrants (whether the House of Saud or Bashar al-Assad). Both the US and Russia are supporting the current governments in Egypt and Afghanistan (with one being a military dictatorship and the other being a puppet government established by a foreign occupation) as another example.

    Syria has been oppressed for half a century by a dictatorship lead by a minority group (the Alawites). Yet, you believe in conspiracy theories regarding those who have risen up against him! The matter of Syria is clear, and there have been attempts going back to the 80s to remove the Assad dynasty from power. It is hypocritical to say that you believe in human freedom and to criticize the monarchies that once ruled over Europe, yet support dictators like those in Syria or Egypt. Russia under Putin is always looking for a way to undermine American interests by supporting other state powers. However, he doesn't care too much about who it is they are assisting as long as their own interests are met. This is why doing things just for your nation’s interests is not always right. Sometimes, it is immoral and corrupt…even if your own people voted for it. But I don’t really think the affairs of Syria or Libya concern the people of Russia (the same is true of Chechnya and the Russian people could live in a far more peaceful and secure life if their leader would end his aggressive policies towards former Russian colonies).

    With regards to Libya – the US and NATO did what they did because of the Arab Spring – in order to try and take advantage of the changing situation and be seen as assisting the people of these countries who were ready to rise up against those governments that had oppressed them for so long. Obviously they failed, but these are the simple reasons for those particular policies by the US, UK, and NATO.

    I do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

    As far as Crimea and Ukraine go, it would be better for the people of these nations if BOTH Russia and the US/NATO stayed out of their affairs. I understand that Crimea believes itself to be part of Russia (as well as the strategic advantage that Crimea gives the Russian military). But Crimea is an exception rather than a rule when it comes to these former Soviet Republics. All those who were once trapped by the Soviet Empire have a right to resist Russia now and be cautious of Russia (even if Putin claims to have begun a new era with regards to Russia’s relations with the rest of the world). It’s no different than the Muslim nations being cautious of any intervention by the US or Europe (particularly after centuries of colonialism). If Putin truly only cared about the interests of Russia and this ascendant middle class you mention, then there is no need to start taking back territory (even if that territory prefers to be a part of the Russian Federation like Crimea).

    It is human nature to want to dominate. I agree. But I disagree with putting your trust in democracy because this tyranny of the majority leads us to become enslaved by our desires. Particularly when the people know that they can simply vote themselves more money and more handouts from their state’s treasury! The cultural marxism that the author of the original article here complains about (and in my opinion, exaggerates) is a direct result of democracy. The things you mention with regards to crony-capitalism banksters and so forth…were empowered by (or took advantage of) democracy. If you got more money than the person next to you, you have a better chance at winning an election as compared to that other person. Multiply this several times over, include control of corporate mass media, and you can effectively exclude most candidates. It’s very difficult to challenge Putin in Russia today (and sure, that might be a good thing compared to what existed in Russia before…but it is not good enough) just as it is very difficult to challenge the two-party system in the US.

    I certainly agree that the imperialism and war crimes of the west (and in particular, their torturous prison camps) are far worse than anything Putin’s Russia is currently doing. However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza. Behind the scenes, the US and Russia work together when it comes to oppressing Muslims and preventing a united Muslim Khalifah (and I’m not talking about the one ISIS declared which was more of a power-grab meant to divide rather than unite the Muslim world). Afghanistan is the best proof of this, having endured a Soviet occupation, then an American and NATO occupation while Putin’s Russia recognized whatever puppet leader was installed in Kabul and gave conditional support to America’s war against the Taliban (a war it still hasn’t even come close to winning).

    With regards to Western Civilization, again immigration across the board (not just European) is what has led to today’s power and hegemony. It must be said that over the last few decades the West has become richer and more powerful than at any time in its history! This is after (not before) massive immigration from people all around the world. We can never discount the land stolen from the Native Americans; or the natural resources stolen from the Muslim world; or the role played by black slave labor in building the US (the most successful country in all of western civilization); or the role played today by illegal immigrants from Mexico in providing cheap labor; or the role played today by child labor in countries like China and Vietnam and so forth on behalf of western corporations; or all the foreigners (some of whom don’t even speak english) working in various university labs at the research level. Now I’m not taking anything away from all the European immigrants and the foundation they established for all of this…but let us be fair and honest. Right or wrong, this is the reality of contemporary western civilization, how it came to be, and why it is as rich and powerful as it is today. Nothing from Hitler, Canada, Putin, or Iceland can compare!

    You might argue that riches and material wealth and geopolitical domination are not what makes western civilization what it is, and that adherence to its underlying values is what it is most important in determining what western culture really is. But for those outside of the west...it is unmistakable to recognize the power and influence that western civilization now exerts over the rest of the world as well as the type of popular culture that it exports to the rest of the world. There is not a Bible or Torah or Quran or other Divine text that explains and sets such standards for what western society truly stands for. There are differing interpretations of each and every constitution found in the nations of the west. There are different shades and understanding of secularism. There are different arguments and debates regarding the limitations of such things as free expression and privacy. There are mixtures of how a democracy and a republic mix. Then of course are the endless disagreements and conflicts regarding the free-market system vs. centralized planning (along with everything in between). Realistically, the US has never had pure capitalism and the former Soviet Union never had pure marxism. It is a mixture of many different things instead (things that are often in chaos and conflict) - which ultimately defines western culture and civilization. That is very different from a specific creed, religion, or philosophy.


    ...when it is subverted and perverted by fiends to their own nefarious ends. Western civilization is in fact a good idea. It means the rule of law. It means the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment. It means the Magna Carta and the concept of democracy. It means reason and an exaltation of the human spirit in high art. It means a respect for the mind of man. It means above all, human freedom. These are good things. And worth preserving...
     
    This can be said about any nation, ideology, or civilization. Many nations and civilizations believe in the rule of law…but they differ with regards to what those laws should be. Without a doubt, there is a tremendous contradiction between Biblical cannon law and the types of laws that have become commonplace in western nations and western society through post-enlightenment secularism.

    Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, and something that is all too easy for those very “crony-capitalist bankers” to take advantage of and infiltrate (which is why earlier I mentioned that it is necessary to critique the foundational beliefs of western civilization in order to understand how these various groups or parties or special-interest lobbies successfully gained power). And I think I’ve already talked about human freedom as it relates to the security states of both the US and Russia. Other European nations (in particular the less powerful ones) are also falling into this on account of the blowback that has resulted from their own government’s policies in joining the UN, NATO, various other international organizations and security pacts (some exceptions of course exist like Greece). But what now exists thanks to technology has ensured that anyone and anything in western civilization can be monitored and spied on (just ask Edward Snowden). The very success of western civilization has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms. The very wars and conflicts that the western world has inflicted upon others, has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms.

    Going back to freedom from a theoretical viewpoint, it is important to remember that there is no such thing as absolute freedom (for that would be the law of the jungle). Don’t you see – it is this very concept, this very belief, this very dogma regarding a vague desire for comprehensive freedom…that has contributed to the corruption of the morals of so many people in western society. You have talked about the Zionists, Bankers, and others (and the author of the above article, Boyd, mentioned cultural marxism)…yet it is this very belief (that serves as one of the foundations for western civilization) which gives those groups and others such opportunity to take control. In other words, you enable them with your own hands and your own heart (even though your own eyes end up looking away and your own voices start to protest)!

    Lastly, with regards to your statements on Islam…that which you accuse Islam of has nothing to do with it. We are not even allowed to have sex before marriage, so how can rape be a part of our religion? In times of war, there may be certain exceptions regarding marriage…but even in this case it is done in a way superior to what any other nation or culture would do. No genocide, no refugee camps, no separating a mother from her children, and none of the despicable things we have seen done to us (like when Russians would rape Afghan women and then throw them out of their planes during the 80s Soviet occupation, or what we have seen the US do in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo and elsewhere). A man cannot have sexual relations with a woman unless he is willing to take care of her and be responsible for her (which is marriage in all cases except prisoners of war). That is the exact opposite of rape, casual sex, one-night stands, and what becomes of female prisoners of war by various countries today. There is a right way and a wrong way to approach war, deal with prisoners of war, and conquer others. Trust in the One who created you to inform you on the right way to do these things (and everything else). Don’t trust yourselves or your own reason and intellect…for satan is always looking to corrupt it and make a fool out of the creation.

    As you said in the beginning…it is human nature to dominate. As Muslims, we say: "We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator"! Western civilization is based on skepticism, Islam is based on unconditional faith. The truth is relative in the western way of thinking, while God is the absolute truth upon which all other truths are based on in Islam. We live for the Hereafter, not this life which is the opposite of what is advocated today in the various secular systems of western society. The Islamic system has certain good aspects of both capitalism and socialism without the bad of those systems. No paper currency (which is so easy to print and exploit). No interest or usury (which is how those very bankers and the institutions they serve gain so much power to begin with. Every human being has the right to food, shelter, and clothing (no one has the right to deny the poor these things even if it goes against some sort of personal theory against welfare states). Beyond the poor tax (and aside from the jizya tax), there are no additional taxes (the treasury of the state is filled by donations, war booty, and administering natural resources). The Earth’s resources do not belong to dictatorships nor to various companies and corporations. The natural resources belong to all the people of a nation and thus, they are administered by the leaders of that nation. No gambling, fornication, or alcohol (and since you mentioned rape, it must be stated that rape occurs the most in environments where there is alcohol and free-mixing between the sexes).

    There are no honor killings in Islam. This is something that occurs outside the laws and boundaries established by the Islamic Shariah, and is one of a great many things used as propaganda against Islam and Muslims. Honor killings are a violation of the Islamic Shariah and in reality, are a cultural phenomenon…one that must be destroyed. Just as you no longer believe in the lies and propaganda that mainstream media sources push to you…do not believe the lies and propaganda against Islam (for truly, much of both of these come from the same source)!

    You mentioned head-slicing (and in no way am I advocating anything that ISIS does for they have become a different sect far away from the pristine sources of Islam), but hasn’t that always been a constant of war? Beheadings were used in the American Revolutionary War against the British (as an example). And it still seems far more humane that the types of atrocities that occur in western p.o.w. camps. You will blame those of course on the zionists, bankers, and others …but from Germany to Serbia, it seems a bit more widespread than that! And since you brought up both rape and the skull tower of Serbs, we certainly can’t forget what drunken Serbs did in Bosnia…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2Q0ju8-yws


    If people in the West desire something more than what they have been told…if they desire something more spiritual and more moral and more fair and less secular and less corrupt and less gluttonous – they will find it in Islam. They are already finding it in Islam. Mankind’s desire is not only to dominate, but to find the truth and know the truth (and then to spread the truth). And once it comes to you…it touches you faster than the speed of light! And there is no going back.

    While Islam is being attacked by the West night and day in a time where the West has the overwhelming advantage in terms of economic power, media control, military power, soft power, firepower, etc…Islam has still managed to win converts (or reverts since we are all Muslim by birth…meaning we are all born upon “fitrah”), and grow in all corners of the various western nations (recall how many Russian Muslims there are without including the Tatars or the Muslim majorities that exist in the Caucasian Mountains and the Central Asian Republics outside of Russia). By contrast, when Europe had fully colonized the Muslim world (and again, they had the full advantage in terms of economic and military power)…the missionaries of the West were still unable to do much and failed in every attempt to bring Christianity into the hearts of the Muslim masses even though the Muslims were in a position of weakness and enslavement at that time.

    {They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords beside God, and they have taken the Messiah, son of Mary (as a god). Whereas they were not commanded but to worship the One God. There is no god but He. Pure is He from what they associate with Him. They would like to extinguish the light of God with their mouths. But even though the unbelievers detest it, God has decided to let His light shine forever. It is God Who sent His Messenger with guidance and a true religion that will prevail over all other religions…even though the polytheists hate it} Quran 9:31-33

  76. @Rurik

    If Jews are partly or fully responsible for the destruction of western civilization many on here claim…then there is no way that Putin can be the last defender of western civilization while at the same time having friendly relations with the state of Israel
     
    First off, Jews who are hostile to Western civilization (and they are legion) are not necessarily Israelis or even Zionists, per se. There is some overlapping to be sure, but one does not equal the other. And Putin is not (yet) the 'last defender of Western civilization'. He just looks like the last best hope today, in light of what pathetic cretins we have as 'leaders'. There still is some hope for Europe to turn things around. The Germans are losing all respect for their media and government. The British want out of Rothschild's EU. The Greeks almost were, and could have been a first domino of sorts. There's all kinds of possibilities today. But yes, Putin alone seems to have the brains and the nads to be the kind of leader we all need. As for his playing footsie with Bibi, that's just realism. Israel is a fact on the ground. It would be silly and foolish not to recognize reality.


    he may still put the interests of various lobbies and elites in Russia above those of his own people. What have the children of Syria or Iraq or Afghanistan done to the people of Russia that allows Putin and those before him to support their destruction and annihilation at the hands of dictatorships?
     
    He inherited the looted country and the oligarchs who had looted it. There again, facts on the ground. How many leaders of which countries do you know who could have had the balls to imprison Rothschild stooge Khodorkovsky? He put that snake in hard labor for a decade or so. Talk about a mini Holocaust in and of itself. He has reined in most of the worst uber-criminals. Berezovsky is rotting in hell. The Russian middle class is ascendant and the Russian people have something ineffable, hope for the future and pride in being Russian again. After sixty years of Jewish commie slavery and genocide, followed by the looting of the country and a plunge into abject poverty and despair, alcoholism, drug addiction and AIDs, look at them now. That is the work of Putin my friend. Does he have a long way to go? Of course. But considering what Yeltsin (and Rothschild) left him, he's performed a miracle.

    As for the war on terror, that too was something he understands. He's having to deal with (real) Muslim terrorists from Chechnya. Scum who gas children. So when 911 happened, it caught us all off guard. Myself included. I figured it was Islamic extremists. They certainly have an axe to grind, so why not? But now that we all know 911 was an inside job, and that the wars on innocent countries like Iraq and Afghanistan were the work of international criminals, who was it that put the stops on the full on destruction of Syria? Putin, that's who. Basically he said they duped him with their lies about humanitarian bombing of Libya, and that he wouldn't be duped again. This is the whole reason they're attacking him and all the lies about MH17 and the bombing of civilians in Ukraine, because they want to rope a dope Putin into a disastrous war with Europe. That way all kinds of white Christians get slaughtered and the Zionists laugh their chubby arses off. But Putin has not played ball with the snakes.

    Those parties that Russia arms and trains (namely Iran and its proxies like Assad and Hezbullah) talk a lot about opposing Israel and liberating Palestine. But in reality, it is all talk. They only look out for their own interests and are completely unable to overthrow the Zionist regime or counter its influence in global politics and finance.



    any more than you or I can. It doesn't mean we have to like it.

    Putin is the same way. He looks out for Russia only (as you stated). That is very different from being some sort of hope for the west or western civilization and culture.
     
    I feel the same way about Iceland. In and of themselves, they're no long term hope for the survival of Western civilization and its people at all. But by example, like Putin they are showing the rest of us the way, if we will only pay attention.


    But there are shades of imperialism in contemporary Russian policy which take us back to the days of the Soviet Empire and its global crusade for power and communism.
     
    I see exactly none of this. This sounds like the hysterics of our controlled media and whore politicians. Are you talking about Crimea? Ukraine? Don't you know these conflicts, just like all the other non-conflicts in the Balkans and elsewhere are the work of festering boils on the body politic like the Kagan Crime Family Inc.? All those insidious "western" NGOs operating over there to undermine the Russian resurgence and return it to international banker domination and exploitation? Come on!

    If you think about it, an economic system with a central decision maker is much more dangerous as compared to a handful of powerful corporations that arise from capitalism…particularly when such a system aspires to become global and dominate the whole world.
     
    the former or the later?

    it is human nature to want to dominate. What we should aspire to is a system of checks and balances. Globalism is a kleptocracy of theft and enslavement of the individual to the crony-capitalist banksters and their assorted whores. I'd put my trust in Iceland and Putin, democracy and autocratic rule respectively far more sanguinely than I'd trust the bankers and their political whores. That's pretty much exactly what gave us the horrors of the last century. And their progeny is drooling to get the war pigs in action once again. Just look at what they're doing the world over. It isn't Putin and his "imperialism" that are bombing and destroying countries right and left, its the occupied west that is doing that. Does Putin run a torture camp? Does he force feed prisoners who just want to die with hoses jammed up their asses? No, that is the work of crony capitalist, bankster fiends. Us in the former and dying west. Not Putin's Russia. By their deeds you shall know them.


    The reality of western civilization is largely a myth.
     
    um.. Bullshit

    Part of western power and success comes from its diversity both in terms of immigration as well as friends and allies from other states.
     
    once yes, when the immigrants were European. Today that is the mantra of the destroyers of Western civilization. ; )

    The other aspect of the contemporary success of the west comes from all the nations it has conquered or defeated and the spoils of war that come from that.
     
    is that the secret of Switzerland's success? Ireland? Canada? Finland? Perhaps that's the secret of Belgium's or Hungary or Austria's success, that they looted from Africa and Asia all that they have. They built nothing, but stole it all from blacks who had created everything of consequence including civilization itself? Are you an American university professor? Perhaps a recent graduate?


    Still, the valiant Afghan people have proven that it is possible to resist both the Russia and the US along with their various allies around the world
     
    I don't know how "valiant" they are, but I do admire the way they destroy empires and wannabe emperors. As for some of their other customs, not so much.


    It has either been fighting against itself, or exporting its violence and conflict throughout the world (often under the guise of wanting to spread western cultural values).
     
    It's true that out of the vanity and arrogance of inbred European monarchs, too often brother was forced to fight brother. But until the last century, the European wars were mostly fought by monarchs using young men as their belligerents when they weren't fighting invading Muslim hoards or Mongols. It was in the last century, when the international bankers at the Federal Reserve and their politician stooges took over the reins of the West that wars were fought on the civilian populations.

    shows just how bloody western civilization can be!
     
    when it is subverted and perverted by fiends to their own nefarious ends. Western civilization is in fact a good idea. It means the rule of law. It means the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment. It means the Magna Carta and the concept of democracy. It means reason and an exaltation of the human spirit in high art. It means a respect for the mind of man. It means above all, human freedom. These are good things. And worth preserving.


    If you want to say that the causes were because of the infiltration of this group or that, then you need to also critique the underlying system of western civilization that allowed such infiltration in the first place.

     

    you sound like that guy in the movie No Country for Old Men, when Anton Chigurh asks Woody: "let me ask you something. If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?"

    good question. Only Western civilization isn't quite yet at the point where it has a shotgun pointed at its heart by a bankster, racial supremacist psychopath who has every intention of shooting. At least not quite yet anyways.


    Because of their wars and war crimes in the Muslim world both the US and Russia
     
    the war crimes the "west" are committing in the Muslim world are on behalf of Zionists and to the detriment of the people of the west, who die in these contrived wars for Israel and bankrupt their future to international banksters/war pigs. For the record.


    both the US and Russia have to varying degrees established security/police states within their own borders.
     
    the police state in the US is a direct consequence of the Mossad's 911 and their agenda of turning us all into Palestinians.

    You can’t fight a war against “terrorism” and still have liberty or an open and free society (which most would agree are hallmarks of western civilization, at least in theory).
     
    Very good! You sound like me now.

    transfer of wealth to the elites (corporatocracy on the western side, oligarchy on the russian side)…it becomes clear that they are both two sides of the same coin!!
     
    No, they used to be. They both existed for the sake and glory of a tiny hand full of corrupt banksters and their stooges. But Putin changed all that. It is in Putin's Russia that the middle class is ascendant, where as the opposite is the case of the occupied west. That's just one more reason they hate Putin and want him dead.


    Islam (in its pristine form) gives mankind a way out of the darkness
     
    yea, right

    another stone age religion is what we in the west need. Keep your doctrins and dogmas and honor killings and clitorectamies and head slicing please. We don't need it or want it. We see how much tolerance there is in Islam as they butcher Christians and rape western school girls in England and Norway and everywhere else they congregate. Keep it, thankyouvery much. We've had our full of Muslim 'tolerance'.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_Tower

    We in the West know all about it.

    In your own lands, we should leave you unmolested to live your lives and worship your God and raise your families. We should trade goods and knowledge and culture where we both prosper in the exchange. Mutual respect of each others cultures is the ticket, and an iron respect for self-determination.

    It is a thread all into itself. But on this one we covered a lot of bases. Sometimes when we bit off too much at one time, we don't get into the nitty-gritty quite as well as we could.

    Still, it was fun ; )

    Rurik – When you fall down as hard as Russia did, the only way to go is up. As long as Russia keeps to herself and doesn’t involve itself in the affairs of others…they most certainly will improve things for their country. Again, Putin is not a hero nor a defender of western civilization. You mention Chechnya, but the reality is that all of the Caucasian and Central Asian republics were a part of the Soviet Empire, and this is the root cause of the problem. The people of Chechnya, Dagestan, and all the surrounding areas want full and complete independence from Russia. Russia needs to stay out of these regions (they can secure their borders) just as the US needs to stay out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Muslim countries. This is an example of Putin following in the footsteps of his Soviet predecessors…not doing the opposite.

    Your justification for Putin’s actions in Syria is no different than those who justify American actions in Saudi Arabia or the other GCC nations. Both the US and Russia are supporting criminal tyrants (whether the House of Saud or Bashar al-Assad). Both the US and Russia are supporting the current governments in Egypt and Afghanistan (with one being a military dictatorship and the other being a puppet government established by a foreign occupation) as another example.

    Syria has been oppressed for half a century by a dictatorship lead by a minority group (the Alawites). Yet, you believe in conspiracy theories regarding those who have risen up against him! The matter of Syria is clear, and there have been attempts going back to the 80s to remove the Assad dynasty from power. It is hypocritical to say that you believe in human freedom and to criticize the monarchies that once ruled over Europe, yet support dictators like those in Syria or Egypt. Russia under Putin is always looking for a way to undermine American interests by supporting other state powers. However, he doesn’t care too much about who it is they are assisting as long as their own interests are met. This is why doing things just for your nation’s interests is not always right. Sometimes, it is immoral and corrupt…even if your own people voted for it. But I don’t really think the affairs of Syria or Libya concern the people of Russia (the same is true of Chechnya and the Russian people could live in a far more peaceful and secure life if their leader would end his aggressive policies towards former Russian colonies).

    With regards to Libya – the US and NATO did what they did because of the Arab Spring – in order to try and take advantage of the changing situation and be seen as assisting the people of these countries who were ready to rise up against those governments that had oppressed them for so long. Obviously they failed, but these are the simple reasons for those particular policies by the US, UK, and NATO.

    I do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

    As far as Crimea and Ukraine go, it would be better for the people of these nations if BOTH Russia and the US/NATO stayed out of their affairs. I understand that Crimea believes itself to be part of Russia (as well as the strategic advantage that Crimea gives the Russian military). But Crimea is an exception rather than a rule when it comes to these former Soviet Republics. All those who were once trapped by the Soviet Empire have a right to resist Russia now and be cautious of Russia (even if Putin claims to have begun a new era with regards to Russia’s relations with the rest of the world). It’s no different than the Muslim nations being cautious of any intervention by the US or Europe (particularly after centuries of colonialism). If Putin truly only cared about the interests of Russia and this ascendant middle class you mention, then there is no need to start taking back territory (even if that territory prefers to be a part of the Russian Federation like Crimea).

    It is human nature to want to dominate. I agree. But I disagree with putting your trust in democracy because this tyranny of the majority leads us to become enslaved by our desires. Particularly when the people know that they can simply vote themselves more money and more handouts from their state’s treasury! The cultural marxism that the author of the original article here complains about (and in my opinion, exaggerates) is a direct result of democracy. The things you mention with regards to crony-capitalism banksters and so forth…were empowered by (or took advantage of) democracy. If you got more money than the person next to you, you have a better chance at winning an election as compared to that other person. Multiply this several times over, include control of corporate mass media, and you can effectively exclude most candidates. It’s very difficult to challenge Putin in Russia today (and sure, that might be a good thing compared to what existed in Russia before…but it is not good enough) just as it is very difficult to challenge the two-party system in the US.

    I certainly agree that the imperialism and war crimes of the west (and in particular, their torturous prison camps) are far worse than anything Putin’s Russia is currently doing. However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza. Behind the scenes, the US and Russia work together when it comes to oppressing Muslims and preventing a united Muslim Khalifah (and I’m not talking about the one ISIS declared which was more of a power-grab meant to divide rather than unite the Muslim world). Afghanistan is the best proof of this, having endured a Soviet occupation, then an American and NATO occupation while Putin’s Russia recognized whatever puppet leader was installed in Kabul and gave conditional support to America’s war against the Taliban (a war it still hasn’t even come close to winning).

    With regards to Western Civilization, again immigration across the board (not just European) is what has led to today’s power and hegemony. It must be said that over the last few decades the West has become richer and more powerful than at any time in its history! This is after (not before) massive immigration from people all around the world. We can never discount the land stolen from the Native Americans; or the natural resources stolen from the Muslim world; or the role played by black slave labor in building the US (the most successful country in all of western civilization); or the role played today by illegal immigrants from Mexico in providing cheap labor; or the role played today by child labor in countries like China and Vietnam and so forth on behalf of western corporations; or all the foreigners (some of whom don’t even speak english) working in various university labs at the research level. Now I’m not taking anything away from all the European immigrants and the foundation they established for all of this…but let us be fair and honest. Right or wrong, this is the reality of contemporary western civilization, how it came to be, and why it is as rich and powerful as it is today. Nothing from Hitler, Canada, Putin, or Iceland can compare!

    You might argue that riches and material wealth and geopolitical domination are not what makes western civilization what it is, and that adherence to its underlying values is what it is most important in determining what western culture really is. But for those outside of the west…it is unmistakable to recognize the power and influence that western civilization now exerts over the rest of the world as well as the type of popular culture that it exports to the rest of the world. There is not a Bible or Torah or Quran or other Divine text that explains and sets such standards for what western society truly stands for. There are differing interpretations of each and every constitution found in the nations of the west. There are different shades and understanding of secularism. There are different arguments and debates regarding the limitations of such things as free expression and privacy. There are mixtures of how a democracy and a republic mix. Then of course are the endless disagreements and conflicts regarding the free-market system vs. centralized planning (along with everything in between). Realistically, the US has never had pure capitalism and the former Soviet Union never had pure marxism. It is a mixture of many different things instead (things that are often in chaos and conflict) – which ultimately defines western culture and civilization. That is very different from a specific creed, religion, or philosophy.

    …when it is subverted and perverted by fiends to their own nefarious ends. Western civilization is in fact a good idea. It means the rule of law. It means the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment. It means the Magna Carta and the concept of democracy. It means reason and an exaltation of the human spirit in high art. It means a respect for the mind of man. It means above all, human freedom. These are good things. And worth preserving…

    This can be said about any nation, ideology, or civilization. Many nations and civilizations believe in the rule of law…but they differ with regards to what those laws should be. Without a doubt, there is a tremendous contradiction between Biblical cannon law and the types of laws that have become commonplace in western nations and western society through post-enlightenment secularism.

    Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, and something that is all too easy for those very “crony-capitalist bankers” to take advantage of and infiltrate (which is why earlier I mentioned that it is necessary to critique the foundational beliefs of western civilization in order to understand how these various groups or parties or special-interest lobbies successfully gained power). And I think I’ve already talked about human freedom as it relates to the security states of both the US and Russia. Other European nations (in particular the less powerful ones) are also falling into this on account of the blowback that has resulted from their own government’s policies in joining the UN, NATO, various other international organizations and security pacts (some exceptions of course exist like Greece). But what now exists thanks to technology has ensured that anyone and anything in western civilization can be monitored and spied on (just ask Edward Snowden). The very success of western civilization has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms. The very wars and conflicts that the western world has inflicted upon others, has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms.

    Going back to freedom from a theoretical viewpoint, it is important to remember that there is no such thing as absolute freedom (for that would be the law of the jungle). Don’t you see – it is this very concept, this very belief, this very dogma regarding a vague desire for comprehensive freedom…that has contributed to the corruption of the morals of so many people in western society. You have talked about the Zionists, Bankers, and others (and the author of the above article, Boyd, mentioned cultural marxism)…yet it is this very belief (that serves as one of the foundations for western civilization) which gives those groups and others such opportunity to take control. In other words, you enable them with your own hands and your own heart (even though your own eyes end up looking away and your own voices start to protest)!

    Lastly, with regards to your statements on Islam…that which you accuse Islam of has nothing to do with it. We are not even allowed to have sex before marriage, so how can rape be a part of our religion? In times of war, there may be certain exceptions regarding marriage…but even in this case it is done in a way superior to what any other nation or culture would do. No genocide, no refugee camps, no separating a mother from her children, and none of the despicable things we have seen done to us (like when Russians would rape Afghan women and then throw them out of their planes during the 80s Soviet occupation, or what we have seen the US do in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo and elsewhere). A man cannot have sexual relations with a woman unless he is willing to take care of her and be responsible for her (which is marriage in all cases except prisoners of war). That is the exact opposite of rape, casual sex, one-night stands, and what becomes of female prisoners of war by various countries today. There is a right way and a wrong way to approach war, deal with prisoners of war, and conquer others. Trust in the One who created you to inform you on the right way to do these things (and everything else). Don’t trust yourselves or your own reason and intellect…for satan is always looking to corrupt it and make a fool out of the creation.

    As you said in the beginning…it is human nature to dominate. As Muslims, we say: “We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator”! Western civilization is based on skepticism, Islam is based on unconditional faith. The truth is relative in the western way of thinking, while God is the absolute truth upon which all other truths are based on in Islam. We live for the Hereafter, not this life which is the opposite of what is advocated today in the various secular systems of western society. The Islamic system has certain good aspects of both capitalism and socialism without the bad of those systems. No paper currency (which is so easy to print and exploit). No interest or usury (which is how those very bankers and the institutions they serve gain so much power to begin with. Every human being has the right to food, shelter, and clothing (no one has the right to deny the poor these things even if it goes against some sort of personal theory against welfare states). Beyond the poor tax (and aside from the jizya tax), there are no additional taxes (the treasury of the state is filled by donations, war booty, and administering natural resources). The Earth’s resources do not belong to dictatorships nor to various companies and corporations. The natural resources belong to all the people of a nation and thus, they are administered by the leaders of that nation. No gambling, fornication, or alcohol (and since you mentioned rape, it must be stated that rape occurs the most in environments where there is alcohol and free-mixing between the sexes).

    There are no honor killings in Islam. This is something that occurs outside the laws and boundaries established by the Islamic Shariah, and is one of a great many things used as propaganda against Islam and Muslims. Honor killings are a violation of the Islamic Shariah and in reality, are a cultural phenomenon…one that must be destroyed. Just as you no longer believe in the lies and propaganda that mainstream media sources push to you…do not believe the lies and propaganda against Islam (for truly, much of both of these come from the same source)!

    You mentioned head-slicing (and in no way am I advocating anything that ISIS does for they have become a different sect far away from the pristine sources of Islam), but hasn’t that always been a constant of war? Beheadings were used in the American Revolutionary War against the British (as an example). And it still seems far more humane that the types of atrocities that occur in western p.o.w. camps. You will blame those of course on the zionists, bankers, and others …but from Germany to Serbia, it seems a bit more widespread than that! And since you brought up both rape and the skull tower of Serbs, we certainly can’t forget what drunken Serbs did in Bosnia…

    If people in the West desire something more than what they have been told…if they desire something more spiritual and more moral and more fair and less secular and less corrupt and less gluttonous – they will find it in Islam. They are already finding it in Islam. Mankind’s desire is not only to dominate, but to find the truth and know the truth (and then to spread the truth). And once it comes to you…it touches you faster than the speed of light! And there is no going back.

    While Islam is being attacked by the West night and day in a time where the West has the overwhelming advantage in terms of economic power, media control, military power, soft power, firepower, etc…Islam has still managed to win converts (or reverts since we are all Muslim by birth…meaning we are all born upon “fitrah”), and grow in all corners of the various western nations (recall how many Russian Muslims there are without including the Tatars or the Muslim majorities that exist in the Caucasian Mountains and the Central Asian Republics outside of Russia). By contrast, when Europe had fully colonized the Muslim world (and again, they had the full advantage in terms of economic and military power)…the missionaries of the West were still unable to do much and failed in every attempt to bring Christianity into the hearts of the Muslim masses even though the Muslims were in a position of weakness and enslavement at that time.

    {They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords beside God, and they have taken the Messiah, son of Mary (as a god). Whereas they were not commanded but to worship the One God. There is no god but He. Pure is He from what they associate with Him. They would like to extinguish the light of God with their mouths. But even though the unbelievers detest it, God has decided to let His light shine forever. It is God Who sent His Messenger with guidance and a true religion that will prevail over all other religions…even though the polytheists hate it} Quran 9:31-33

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Do you have any idea how many different nationalities live in Dagestan, all ready to fight each other at the drop of a hat?
    , @Rurik
    OK, here we go.. ; )

    When you fall down as hard as Russia did, the only way to go is up.
     
    You're not giving Putin any credit. What he managed was a miracle. Russia was slated for eternal depravation and her resources looted for perpetuity by the International Oligarchs as the Russian people slipped away into the dust bin of obscurity and privation that they suffered under for so damn long.

    The people of Chechnya, Dagestan, and all the surrounding areas want full and complete independence from Russia. Russia needs to stay out of these regions (they can secure their borders) just as the US needs to stay out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Muslim countries.
     
    it is dishonest to pretend that Russia's relationship with Chechnya is equal to the wars of aggression the US has waged on Iraq and others. Iraq is thousands of miles away from the US, whereas Chechnya is on Russia's doorstep.

    Who is Ramzan Kadyrov? Isn't he Putin's good friend? Doesn't he have like a thousand wives or something? Half of them teenagers?

    It would be better if we could cover a little less ground with these posts, then we might be able to flesh this stuff out a little better.


    Your justification for Putin’s actions in Syria is no different than those who justify American actions in Saudi Arabia or the other GCC nations. Both the US and Russia are supporting criminal tyrants (whether the House of Saud or Bashar al-Assad).
     
    OMG you're one of those?!

    You too want to see Syria utterly destroyed by head slicers and cannibals funded by the Zionists and Sunnis because Assad is of the wrong tribe and tolerates Christians (infidels) in Syria?

    I have to admit it's fascinating to hear at least someone try to make that case. I couldn't believe that shit-bag Morsi as soon as he comes to power wants to align with the Zionists and destroy yet another Muslim country. What is it with you guys? You hate your brothers so much you're all willing to toss the Palestinians under the Zionist boot so you can slice some of your fellow Muslim's head's off. I really don't get it. Please help us all to understand this madness.

    , yet support dictators like those in Syria or Egypt
     
    From what I know about Assad is that like Gadaffi, he has kept the peace and tolerates Christians and others. I know when a vote was recently held that the people of Syria overwhelmingly voted to keep Assad in office. I also know many of the men trying to kill Assad are what I consider sub-human beasts. To whit :

    http://www.redstate.com/uploads/2014/09/syria-execution.jpg

    those men have been tortured

    it sickens me to think my tax dollars are going to human garbage like that

    And no, the US and NATO did not want to help the Libyan people. Please. They wanted to destroy Libya (and Gadhafi's gold Dinar) just like they wanted to destroy Iraq and every other country that could be seen as a potential obstacle to Greater Israel.

    I do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.
     
    http://www.altacocker.com/other_items/thermite/thermite_wtc-core-beam-cut.jpg

    we can discuss that elsewhere


    As far as Crimea and Ukraine go, it would be better for the people of these nations if BOTH Russia and the US/NATO stayed out of their affairs.
     
    sometime you seem to have no clue whatsoever. Russia was forced to respond to what the US and NATO were doing. They would be thrilled if the US would just stop fomenting wars. Putin and Russia only want trade and prosperity. These conflicts are being imposed on them. Are you too blinded by your tribal and religious resentments to see the obvious?

    However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza.
     
    What are you talking about? Russia is against the conflict in Syria. You have things ass-backwards my friend.

    As for the Taliban and other intrigues and conflicts in the region vis a vis Russia, Putin and Islam, I really don't know enough about it all.

    With regards to Western Civilization, again immigration across the board (not just European) is what has led to today’s power and hegemony. It must be said that over the last few decades the West has become richer and more powerful than at any time in its history! This is after (not before) massive immigration from people all around the world. We can never discount the land stolen from the Native Americans; or the natural resources stolen from the Muslim world; or the role played by black slave labor in building the US (the most successful country in all of western civilization); or the role played today by illegal immigrants from Mexico in providing cheap labor; or the role played today by child labor in countries like China and Vietnam and so forth on behalf of western corporations; or all the foreigners (some of whom don’t even speak english) working in various university labs at the research level
     
    You know what this sounds like? The same pathetic tripe I hear all day long. 'Whitey is evil and all his accomplishments are from non-white people who he's exploited and he needs massive non-white immigration, blah, blah, *hurl* blah.

    Fuck all that.

    Like I said, I don't know too much about the details on the ground over there in Russia vs. the Muslims. But what I can tell you, is that if the Muslim's problem with Putin is that he doesn't allow enough non-Russian immigration into Russia, then I stand 100% with Putin, and would tell all non-Russians to fuck the hell off. Russia, like Europe and the rest of the white countries have just as much right to maintain their ethnicity and culture and self-determination as anyone else. And anyone who thinks otherwise can suck an egg. Dry.


    for what western society truly stands for.
     
    At one time it stood for honor and truth and freedom for the people of Western society. Today it has been perverted and subverted to mean sodomy and pedastery and corruption of the human spirit.

    The very wars and conflicts that the western world has inflicted upon others, has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms.
     
    The recent wars you're talking about are also inflicted upon the (now completely corrupted) western world. When the West was the West, we would have hanged by the neck every single politician who had betrayed their sacred oath to the Constitution and the people of the US. But today the west (especially in the US and England and France) are a rotted out corpse of what we once were. If we still had the spirit of the true West, that honored things like truth, we wouldn't be waging wars based on lies. It wasn't the wars that lead to our undoing, those were a consequence of having our spirit murdered by alien banksters who had taken the reins of our civilization and plunged us on the rocks of destruction.

    yet it is this very belief (that serves as one of the foundations for western civilization) which gives those groups and others such opportunity to take control.
     
    it wasn't our belief in freedom that allowed these "other groups' to take control. It was our suicidally insane immigration policy that allowed them to enter our societies and undermine them for their own tribal ends. The same kind of immigration madness you seem to be advocating.

    We are not even allowed to have sex before marriage, so how can rape be a part of our religion?
     
    um.. think about that for a second.

    and it doesn't matter whether or not your religion permits rape, it's enough that Muslims are raping school girls and young women at epidemic proportions in non-Muslim countries. Often gang rapes and there's a whole sub-culture of Muslims that prey on these young girls and women.

    In times of war, there may be certain exceptions regarding marriage…but even in this case it is done in a way superior to what any other nation or culture would do.
     
    is this an attempt to try to justify rape? I guess because you're in a perpetual state of war with the infidels that is permissible to rape their women. Since it is an act of war? WTF?

    A man cannot have sexual relations with a woman unless he is willing to take care of her and be responsible for her (which is marriage in all cases except prisoners of war). That is the exact opposite of rape,
     
    what about the prisoners of war? They're OK to rape? It's not "rape"?

    There is a right way and a wrong way to approach war, deal with prisoners of war, and conquer others.
     
    a right way to "conquer others"? really?!


    Trust in the One who created you to inform you on the right way to do these things (and everything else). Don’t trust yourselves or your own reason and intellect…
     
    You're for real, aren't you?

    As you said in the beginning…it is human nature to dominate. As Muslims, we say: “We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator”!
     
    *whooo*

    Islam is based on unconditional faith. The truth is relative in the western way of thinking, while God is the absolute truth upon which all other truths are based on in Islam.
     
    OK

    No interest or usury (which is how those very bankers and the institutions they serve gain so much power to begin with
     
    I agree with you there!

    And I'm sure there are very many beautiful and sublime tenants and truths in Islam. I respect all religions that are peaceful and humane. In so far as Islam is peaceful and respectful of other people's right to their religious beliefs, then I say salam alaikum to them.

    However, as soon as they get some inkling that it's their job to spread their Islamic "truths" by the sword (or immigration) into non-Islamic lands, (like they did at one time to Andalusia or more recently to Kosovo), then all my good will goes right out the window. And I become the flaming sword of the Western man's Western blood and the vengeance of his fallen heroes and Saints. And all shall feel his terrible wrath.

    Other than that.. ; )

    It was fun my friend.

    There is much we can learn about each other's cultures and 'truths'.

    God bless
    , @Bliss

    As Muslims, we say: “We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator”!
     
    The act of worship that defines Islam is prostrating to the Kaaba 5 times a day. Here is the Kaaba:

    http://almiskeenah.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/changing-kiswa-1432c.jpg


    Is that the Creator? GTFO...
  77. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Enrique Cardova
    Fred gave 4 points in defense:

    I. t was not the national flag of the Confederacy that flew over slavery, but, rather, was carried by soldiers, 90-plus per cent who did not own slaves (which was roughly comparable to percentages in various regiments of the Union army..
    But this is not true. In the years of fighting, the Confederate flag DID fly over slavery, and in defense of slavery. Almost every Southern Declaration of Secession mentions slavery as the primary "states right" at issue. And they went to war to keep slavery, and flew a flag, towards that end..


    .
    2. The Battle Flag was designed to represent the historic Celtic and Christian origin of many Southerners and served as a soldier’ flag.
    True as to some details of the layout, but again, it was flown in defense of the "state's right" of slavery. And the battle Flag was not designed as any "cultural celebration". It was a BATTLE Flag- designed to rally and inspire white troops to fight for slavery. Some say it was "states rights". Well, what was the "states rights" at stake and under dispute? Slavery. No amount of "heritage" revisionism can get around this fact.

    .
    3. That is, those Southerners who took up arms in 1861 to defend their states, their homes, and their families, were engaged in “rebellion” and were “traitors” under Federal law.
    But the Confederate government was in secession of the legally constituted federal government, and as such, falls under almost every credible definition of "traitorous" used in the Western world. When the US broke away from England, the Americans were deemed "traitors." The only reason Americans are not called "traitors" today, is because they won that war. Had they lost, the American rebels would simply been another n the long line of forgotten insurgents against the colonial overlord.

    Fred avoids this point instead switching quickly to the status of Robert E. Lee. But Lee formally resigning from the US Army does not make him any less of a traitor. He resigned from the Army but did not renounce his US citizenship. He then went and joined a movement in rebellion against the legally constituted government of the United States. "Treason" was specifically defined in constitutional documents - the only crime so defined. Article III Section 3 delineates treason as follows:

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
     
    ^^Under this constitutional definition, Robert E. Lee was a traitor.


    .
    4. And that brings us to point four: the right of secession and whether the actions of the Southern states, December 1860-May 1861, could be justified under the US Constitution.

    What Fred forgets to mention is that some southern states had threatened to secede long before the Civil War, over tariffs, and were barred from doing o under threat. Fred again avoids addressing this history. QUOTE:

    Southerners had also discussed secession in the nation’s early years, concerned over talk of abolishing slavery. But when push came to shove in 1832, it was not over slavery but tariffs. National tariffs were passed that protected Northern manufacturers but increased prices for manufactured goods purchased in the predominantly agricultural South, where the Tariff of 1828 was dubbed the "Tariff of Abominations." The legislature of South Carolina declared the tariff acts of 1828 and 1832 were "unauthorized by the constitution of the United States" and voted them null, void and non-binding on the state.

    President Andrew Jackson responded with a Proclamation of Force, declaring, "I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one state, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed." (Emphasis is Jackson’s). Congress authorized Jackson to use military force if necessary to enforce the law (every Southern senator walked out in protest before the vote was taken). That proved unnecessary, as a compromise tariff was approved, and South Carolina rescinded its Nullification Ordinance."
    http://www.historynet.com/secession
     
    ^^Note: The man threatening force to prevent secession is not a weak "liberal" but right wing hero Andrew Jackson. Jackson said, and its worth repeating:

    "I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one state, incompatible with the existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed."

    In short, right wing hero Andrew Jackson himself rejected Southern "nullification" a doctrine which developed into one of the foundations of secession.

    You seem to be one of people that I often encounter on the internet, who can read through a well reasoned defense or apologetic with no more comprehension that a billy goat staring at a wrist watch. Let’s consider your objections to the author’s theses one by one:

    1. The Battle Flag flew over slavery. Well, so did the US flag, for nearly 80 years. The 13 stripe flag also flew over slave States like MO, KY, MD and DL for the entire course of the war. The US flag was displayed over these Union Slave States which were excluded from the Emancipation Proclamation and which retained slavery until the 13th amendment was ratified over 6 months following the close of the war. As far as the Secession Ordinances and Declarations of Causes, apparently you haven’t bothered to read them. If you did, you may have noticed that only 4 of them (SC, GA, MS and TX) invoke slavery as a reason for secession and even in these cases, it’s to note that the northern States failed to abide by their Constitutional duties under the fugitive slave laws and/or to simply note that slavery was a vital element of the social and economic order of the South.

    2. You then state that Battle Flag was designed to inspire Confederate soldiers to “fight for slavery”. That would be a pretty impressive accomplishment for a flag over an army where ca. 90% of the soldiers didn’t have slaves and had no prospect of ever having slaves. The Southern soldiers was sufficiently inspired to fight in defense of his home and family ; he didn’t need a flag to compel him to take up arms against the invaders of his country.

    3. It is irrational and nescient to argue that Southern States were in rebellion or that Southerners were traitors. The original 13 States were recognized as separate, independent countries by the Crown in the Treaty of Paris, 1783. Some of these independent nations then joined in a confederated republic by ratifying the Constitution, except that two of them, NC and RI stayed out for 1 ½ years before joining, retaining their independence. Once the States resumed their lawful status as independent countries by withdrawing from the Union, they no longer had any legal obligations to the federal govt. Their situation was NOT like that of the Founding Fathers who actually were committing treason against the Crown. The federal govt was the creation of the States (as the author notes) and the State retained the right to belong or disassociate. You then claim that Gen. Lee failed to resign his US citizenship. Well, that would have been rather difficult because there was no such thing as US citizenship at the time. One was a citizen of one’s State, and in Lee’s case, that was VA. If one’s State was in the federal Union, then one had status as a “citizen” of the US, but once your State left the Union, you no longer had any legal claim to citizenship.

    4. The author points out something that most people who are informed on this topic already know, i.e., that secession was a right almost universally held to exist in States of the North and the South. The New England States considered or threatened secession in 1803, 1807 and 1814 and again in 1845. Jefferson noted that some of the western States might want to secede and form a Mississippi Confederation, and if so, that was their right. In early 1861, hundreds of NORTHERN newspaper editorials reiterated the right of States to seceded. It is simply ignorant cant to try and claim that there was no right of secession under the Constitution, considering its nature and history of ratification

    Read More
  78. @Rurik

    The prevailing ideas entertained by him [Thomas Jefferson] and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time…Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races..."
     
    "It' didn't rest on the "assumption of the equality of races", but rather the fundamental right of all men, regardless of their respective abilities- to live free. IOW is was/is of no matter that they weren't equal in all things, it is the God given right of all men, no matter how unequal individually or racially, that they should be free.


    "Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate, than that these people are to be free; nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion have drawn indelible lines of distinction between them." - Jefferson

    By the Orwellian standards of today, men like Lincoln or Jefferson before him were raging, half-baked racists of the worst order. Not only did they see the obvious differences in the temperaments, proclivities and abilities of the races, they didn't believe that the path to utopia and eternal, universal harmony was forced integration- like the recent 'disparate impact' agenda.

    Is it just possible that some of the rancor over race today in America (and the Confederate flag) is due to the fact that the simple, innocent observations of men like Lincoln and Jefferson regarding the races- would get you fired from any job of consequence were you to notice the same, glaringly obvious things, and mention them?

    Is it possible that even today, in our unique age of 'enlightenment', that men (black or white or otherwise) who don't want to be force-integrated- might resent the efforts of the fecal government to do so? And that rebel flag just might be a symbol of those, especially hated Southern, working class white folks, who tho they may have no animosity towards anyone of any race, don't feel that the only way forward is to see their ancestors maligned as vile racists, their communities transformed, their character and kin impugned as evil for the thought-crime of thinking nothing more than what Lincoln and Jefferson themselves both thought, that the races are different, and that they both thrive and are happiest when they're allowed to seek their own destiny in their own ways?

    And that rebel flag just might be a symbol of those, especially hated Southern, working class white folks, who tho they may have no animosity towards anyone of any race,

    How can you say that with a straight face? Their words and actions loudly announce their racial animosities to the whole world.

    If you fly the confederate or nazi flags you are proudly telling the world that you agree with the founding principles of the Confederacy or the Third Reich. So don’t act surprised when there is a hostile reaction from those who deem those principles to be evil.

    As for Thomas Jefferson, he had a sexual affair and 4 children with his black slave Sally Hemings. He translated a book of his good friend Count Volney the french philosopher, historian, abolitionist who espoused views that would be called afrocentrist today:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_Fran%C3%A7ois_de_Chasseb%C5%93uf,_comte_de_Volney

    What does that tell you?

    And as for Abraham Lincoln, isn’t he the arch enemy to you confederate flag wavers? It must really burn you up inside to see how mainstream America considers him the greatest of all the Presidents. Well, he sure didn’t look like a WASP did he? That’s because he must have had some african and some native american ancestors. Likely, he was a melungeon:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=melungeon&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=595&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMIt5eEyt2OxwIV0TiICh0Seg-a

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    I wandered in here by accident and have, as they say, no dog in this fight. Nevertheless I couldn't help but notice the ridiculousness of your comment.

    [As for Thomas Jefferson, he had a sexual affair and 4 children with his black slave Sally Hemings.]

    No, the evidence indicated only that someone of Jefferson's male line fathered children on Hemings. His nephews stayed frequently on his estate.

    [Well, he sure didn’t look like a WASP did he?]

    Assertion not argument.

    , @Rurik
    Why do you hate white folks Bliss?

    Did a white girl snub you?
  79. @Sonic
    Rurik – When you fall down as hard as Russia did, the only way to go is up. As long as Russia keeps to herself and doesn’t involve itself in the affairs of others…they most certainly will improve things for their country. Again, Putin is not a hero nor a defender of western civilization. You mention Chechnya, but the reality is that all of the Caucasian and Central Asian republics were a part of the Soviet Empire, and this is the root cause of the problem. The people of Chechnya, Dagestan, and all the surrounding areas want full and complete independence from Russia. Russia needs to stay out of these regions (they can secure their borders) just as the US needs to stay out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Muslim countries. This is an example of Putin following in the footsteps of his Soviet predecessors…not doing the opposite.

    Your justification for Putin’s actions in Syria is no different than those who justify American actions in Saudi Arabia or the other GCC nations. Both the US and Russia are supporting criminal tyrants (whether the House of Saud or Bashar al-Assad). Both the US and Russia are supporting the current governments in Egypt and Afghanistan (with one being a military dictatorship and the other being a puppet government established by a foreign occupation) as another example.

    Syria has been oppressed for half a century by a dictatorship lead by a minority group (the Alawites). Yet, you believe in conspiracy theories regarding those who have risen up against him! The matter of Syria is clear, and there have been attempts going back to the 80s to remove the Assad dynasty from power. It is hypocritical to say that you believe in human freedom and to criticize the monarchies that once ruled over Europe, yet support dictators like those in Syria or Egypt. Russia under Putin is always looking for a way to undermine American interests by supporting other state powers. However, he doesn't care too much about who it is they are assisting as long as their own interests are met. This is why doing things just for your nation’s interests is not always right. Sometimes, it is immoral and corrupt…even if your own people voted for it. But I don’t really think the affairs of Syria or Libya concern the people of Russia (the same is true of Chechnya and the Russian people could live in a far more peaceful and secure life if their leader would end his aggressive policies towards former Russian colonies).

    With regards to Libya – the US and NATO did what they did because of the Arab Spring – in order to try and take advantage of the changing situation and be seen as assisting the people of these countries who were ready to rise up against those governments that had oppressed them for so long. Obviously they failed, but these are the simple reasons for those particular policies by the US, UK, and NATO.

    I do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

    As far as Crimea and Ukraine go, it would be better for the people of these nations if BOTH Russia and the US/NATO stayed out of their affairs. I understand that Crimea believes itself to be part of Russia (as well as the strategic advantage that Crimea gives the Russian military). But Crimea is an exception rather than a rule when it comes to these former Soviet Republics. All those who were once trapped by the Soviet Empire have a right to resist Russia now and be cautious of Russia (even if Putin claims to have begun a new era with regards to Russia’s relations with the rest of the world). It’s no different than the Muslim nations being cautious of any intervention by the US or Europe (particularly after centuries of colonialism). If Putin truly only cared about the interests of Russia and this ascendant middle class you mention, then there is no need to start taking back territory (even if that territory prefers to be a part of the Russian Federation like Crimea).

    It is human nature to want to dominate. I agree. But I disagree with putting your trust in democracy because this tyranny of the majority leads us to become enslaved by our desires. Particularly when the people know that they can simply vote themselves more money and more handouts from their state’s treasury! The cultural marxism that the author of the original article here complains about (and in my opinion, exaggerates) is a direct result of democracy. The things you mention with regards to crony-capitalism banksters and so forth…were empowered by (or took advantage of) democracy. If you got more money than the person next to you, you have a better chance at winning an election as compared to that other person. Multiply this several times over, include control of corporate mass media, and you can effectively exclude most candidates. It’s very difficult to challenge Putin in Russia today (and sure, that might be a good thing compared to what existed in Russia before…but it is not good enough) just as it is very difficult to challenge the two-party system in the US.

    I certainly agree that the imperialism and war crimes of the west (and in particular, their torturous prison camps) are far worse than anything Putin’s Russia is currently doing. However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza. Behind the scenes, the US and Russia work together when it comes to oppressing Muslims and preventing a united Muslim Khalifah (and I’m not talking about the one ISIS declared which was more of a power-grab meant to divide rather than unite the Muslim world). Afghanistan is the best proof of this, having endured a Soviet occupation, then an American and NATO occupation while Putin’s Russia recognized whatever puppet leader was installed in Kabul and gave conditional support to America’s war against the Taliban (a war it still hasn’t even come close to winning).

    With regards to Western Civilization, again immigration across the board (not just European) is what has led to today’s power and hegemony. It must be said that over the last few decades the West has become richer and more powerful than at any time in its history! This is after (not before) massive immigration from people all around the world. We can never discount the land stolen from the Native Americans; or the natural resources stolen from the Muslim world; or the role played by black slave labor in building the US (the most successful country in all of western civilization); or the role played today by illegal immigrants from Mexico in providing cheap labor; or the role played today by child labor in countries like China and Vietnam and so forth on behalf of western corporations; or all the foreigners (some of whom don’t even speak english) working in various university labs at the research level. Now I’m not taking anything away from all the European immigrants and the foundation they established for all of this…but let us be fair and honest. Right or wrong, this is the reality of contemporary western civilization, how it came to be, and why it is as rich and powerful as it is today. Nothing from Hitler, Canada, Putin, or Iceland can compare!

    You might argue that riches and material wealth and geopolitical domination are not what makes western civilization what it is, and that adherence to its underlying values is what it is most important in determining what western culture really is. But for those outside of the west...it is unmistakable to recognize the power and influence that western civilization now exerts over the rest of the world as well as the type of popular culture that it exports to the rest of the world. There is not a Bible or Torah or Quran or other Divine text that explains and sets such standards for what western society truly stands for. There are differing interpretations of each and every constitution found in the nations of the west. There are different shades and understanding of secularism. There are different arguments and debates regarding the limitations of such things as free expression and privacy. There are mixtures of how a democracy and a republic mix. Then of course are the endless disagreements and conflicts regarding the free-market system vs. centralized planning (along with everything in between). Realistically, the US has never had pure capitalism and the former Soviet Union never had pure marxism. It is a mixture of many different things instead (things that are often in chaos and conflict) - which ultimately defines western culture and civilization. That is very different from a specific creed, religion, or philosophy.


    ...when it is subverted and perverted by fiends to their own nefarious ends. Western civilization is in fact a good idea. It means the rule of law. It means the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment. It means the Magna Carta and the concept of democracy. It means reason and an exaltation of the human spirit in high art. It means a respect for the mind of man. It means above all, human freedom. These are good things. And worth preserving...
     
    This can be said about any nation, ideology, or civilization. Many nations and civilizations believe in the rule of law…but they differ with regards to what those laws should be. Without a doubt, there is a tremendous contradiction between Biblical cannon law and the types of laws that have become commonplace in western nations and western society through post-enlightenment secularism.

    Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, and something that is all too easy for those very “crony-capitalist bankers” to take advantage of and infiltrate (which is why earlier I mentioned that it is necessary to critique the foundational beliefs of western civilization in order to understand how these various groups or parties or special-interest lobbies successfully gained power). And I think I’ve already talked about human freedom as it relates to the security states of both the US and Russia. Other European nations (in particular the less powerful ones) are also falling into this on account of the blowback that has resulted from their own government’s policies in joining the UN, NATO, various other international organizations and security pacts (some exceptions of course exist like Greece). But what now exists thanks to technology has ensured that anyone and anything in western civilization can be monitored and spied on (just ask Edward Snowden). The very success of western civilization has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms. The very wars and conflicts that the western world has inflicted upon others, has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms.

    Going back to freedom from a theoretical viewpoint, it is important to remember that there is no such thing as absolute freedom (for that would be the law of the jungle). Don’t you see – it is this very concept, this very belief, this very dogma regarding a vague desire for comprehensive freedom…that has contributed to the corruption of the morals of so many people in western society. You have talked about the Zionists, Bankers, and others (and the author of the above article, Boyd, mentioned cultural marxism)…yet it is this very belief (that serves as one of the foundations for western civilization) which gives those groups and others such opportunity to take control. In other words, you enable them with your own hands and your own heart (even though your own eyes end up looking away and your own voices start to protest)!

    Lastly, with regards to your statements on Islam…that which you accuse Islam of has nothing to do with it. We are not even allowed to have sex before marriage, so how can rape be a part of our religion? In times of war, there may be certain exceptions regarding marriage…but even in this case it is done in a way superior to what any other nation or culture would do. No genocide, no refugee camps, no separating a mother from her children, and none of the despicable things we have seen done to us (like when Russians would rape Afghan women and then throw them out of their planes during the 80s Soviet occupation, or what we have seen the US do in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo and elsewhere). A man cannot have sexual relations with a woman unless he is willing to take care of her and be responsible for her (which is marriage in all cases except prisoners of war). That is the exact opposite of rape, casual sex, one-night stands, and what becomes of female prisoners of war by various countries today. There is a right way and a wrong way to approach war, deal with prisoners of war, and conquer others. Trust in the One who created you to inform you on the right way to do these things (and everything else). Don’t trust yourselves or your own reason and intellect…for satan is always looking to corrupt it and make a fool out of the creation.

    As you said in the beginning…it is human nature to dominate. As Muslims, we say: "We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator"! Western civilization is based on skepticism, Islam is based on unconditional faith. The truth is relative in the western way of thinking, while God is the absolute truth upon which all other truths are based on in Islam. We live for the Hereafter, not this life which is the opposite of what is advocated today in the various secular systems of western society. The Islamic system has certain good aspects of both capitalism and socialism without the bad of those systems. No paper currency (which is so easy to print and exploit). No interest or usury (which is how those very bankers and the institutions they serve gain so much power to begin with. Every human being has the right to food, shelter, and clothing (no one has the right to deny the poor these things even if it goes against some sort of personal theory against welfare states). Beyond the poor tax (and aside from the jizya tax), there are no additional taxes (the treasury of the state is filled by donations, war booty, and administering natural resources). The Earth’s resources do not belong to dictatorships nor to various companies and corporations. The natural resources belong to all the people of a nation and thus, they are administered by the leaders of that nation. No gambling, fornication, or alcohol (and since you mentioned rape, it must be stated that rape occurs the most in environments where there is alcohol and free-mixing between the sexes).

    There are no honor killings in Islam. This is something that occurs outside the laws and boundaries established by the Islamic Shariah, and is one of a great many things used as propaganda against Islam and Muslims. Honor killings are a violation of the Islamic Shariah and in reality, are a cultural phenomenon…one that must be destroyed. Just as you no longer believe in the lies and propaganda that mainstream media sources push to you…do not believe the lies and propaganda against Islam (for truly, much of both of these come from the same source)!

    You mentioned head-slicing (and in no way am I advocating anything that ISIS does for they have become a different sect far away from the pristine sources of Islam), but hasn’t that always been a constant of war? Beheadings were used in the American Revolutionary War against the British (as an example). And it still seems far more humane that the types of atrocities that occur in western p.o.w. camps. You will blame those of course on the zionists, bankers, and others …but from Germany to Serbia, it seems a bit more widespread than that! And since you brought up both rape and the skull tower of Serbs, we certainly can’t forget what drunken Serbs did in Bosnia…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2Q0ju8-yws


    If people in the West desire something more than what they have been told…if they desire something more spiritual and more moral and more fair and less secular and less corrupt and less gluttonous – they will find it in Islam. They are already finding it in Islam. Mankind’s desire is not only to dominate, but to find the truth and know the truth (and then to spread the truth). And once it comes to you…it touches you faster than the speed of light! And there is no going back.

    While Islam is being attacked by the West night and day in a time where the West has the overwhelming advantage in terms of economic power, media control, military power, soft power, firepower, etc…Islam has still managed to win converts (or reverts since we are all Muslim by birth…meaning we are all born upon “fitrah”), and grow in all corners of the various western nations (recall how many Russian Muslims there are without including the Tatars or the Muslim majorities that exist in the Caucasian Mountains and the Central Asian Republics outside of Russia). By contrast, when Europe had fully colonized the Muslim world (and again, they had the full advantage in terms of economic and military power)…the missionaries of the West were still unable to do much and failed in every attempt to bring Christianity into the hearts of the Muslim masses even though the Muslims were in a position of weakness and enslavement at that time.

    {They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords beside God, and they have taken the Messiah, son of Mary (as a god). Whereas they were not commanded but to worship the One God. There is no god but He. Pure is He from what they associate with Him. They would like to extinguish the light of God with their mouths. But even though the unbelievers detest it, God has decided to let His light shine forever. It is God Who sent His Messenger with guidance and a true religion that will prevail over all other religions…even though the polytheists hate it} Quran 9:31-33

    Do you have any idea how many different nationalities live in Dagestan, all ready to fight each other at the drop of a hat?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    5371 - Nothing like having a common enemy to unite you though - which is what Russia may become if their expansion into the Ukraine is repeated elsewhere. But this does not mean I support the expansion of the US or NATO.

    I'm not sure if it is in this thread or the various articles by Patrick Cockburn, but I have always maintained that European colonialism did not create divisions in the Muslim countries and third-world countries but rather, exploited and made worse those divisions. The same can be said about Russia's long imperial history.

    It is sad and regrettable that this exists in so many parts of the world and in so many places including Dagestan (as you point out). But whether it is the topic of Boyd's article here and the divisions between northern idealism and southern culture within the US, or the racial conflict in the US, or wars between monarchies in Europe, or differences between ethnic groups, tribes, and nationalities elsewhere...I oppose all of it. I oppose nationalism in every sense of its being...whether east or west, indigenous or imposed (with alot of contemporary nationalism in the middle east imposed by european colonialism).

    What I've written in my responses here to Rurik is my attempt to provide a solution. It is easy to criticize anything and everything, but much more difficult to stand for something. Still, it is the least I can do. We are all children of God (the Most High, the Most Unique, the Most Transcendent). We are all of the lineage and bloodline of Adam (as) and Eve (ra). We should be brothers and sisters in the worship of God - not associating any partners or rivals or intermediaries with God (who is separate, distinct, above, and unlike that which is created). That worship is both personal (through prayers, supplication, dhikr, charity, pilgrimage, good deeds, good manners, kindness, compassion, truthfulness, taqwa, and so forth), as well as public (how we setup our state, the laws that are established, the economic system that is put into place, the cultural norms and limitations as well as outward moral behavior, how war is conducted, and so on and so forth).

    Of course, some people will always make mistakes and commit crimes and aggression in the name of God and the same will occur with regards to those who fight for or represent something other than God. The shaytan (devils) will always work to corrupt us and cause us to do evil and to divide us by nationality or race or tribe or language or wealth or whatever. This is all part of the test of this life - which is temporary. The goal is the Hereafter - which is eternal.

    and Allah knows best.
  80. @Bliss

    And that rebel flag just might be a symbol of those, especially hated Southern, working class white folks, who tho they may have no animosity towards anyone of any race,
     
    How can you say that with a straight face? Their words and actions loudly announce their racial animosities to the whole world.

    If you fly the confederate or nazi flags you are proudly telling the world that you agree with the founding principles of the Confederacy or the Third Reich. So don't act surprised when there is a hostile reaction from those who deem those principles to be evil.

    As for Thomas Jefferson, he had a sexual affair and 4 children with his black slave Sally Hemings. He translated a book of his good friend Count Volney the french philosopher, historian, abolitionist who espoused views that would be called afrocentrist today:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_Fran%C3%A7ois_de_Chasseb%C5%93uf,_comte_de_Volney

    What does that tell you?




    And as for Abraham Lincoln, isn't he the arch enemy to you confederate flag wavers? It must really burn you up inside to see how mainstream America considers him the greatest of all the Presidents. Well, he sure didn't look like a WASP did he? That's because he must have had some african and some native american ancestors. Likely, he was a melungeon:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=melungeon&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=595&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMIt5eEyt2OxwIV0TiICh0Seg-a

    I wandered in here by accident and have, as they say, no dog in this fight. Nevertheless I couldn’t help but notice the ridiculousness of your comment.

    [As for Thomas Jefferson, he had a sexual affair and 4 children with his black slave Sally Hemings.]

    No, the evidence indicated only that someone of Jefferson’s male line fathered children on Hemings. His nephews stayed frequently on his estate.

    [Well, he sure didn’t look like a WASP did he?]

    Assertion not argument.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    No, the evidence indicated only that someone of Jefferson’s male line fathered children on Hemings. His nephews stayed frequently on his estate.
     
    Of course you didn't provide any evidence to support your assertion. Here is the evidence:

    http://www.monticello.org/site/plantation-and-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-brief-account

    Based on documentary, scientific, statistical, and oral history evidence, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation (TJF) Research Committee Report on Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings (January 2000) remains the most comprehensive analysis of this historical topic. Ten years later, TJF and most historians believe that, years after his wife’s death, Thomas Jefferson was the father of the six children of Sally Hemings mentioned in Jefferson's records, including Beverly, Harriet, Madison, and Eston Hemings.

    The DNA testing found no genetic link between the Hemings and Carr descendants, refuting Jefferson’s grandchildren’s assertion that his Carr nephews fathered Sally Hemings’s children.
  81. @Sonic
    Rurik – When you fall down as hard as Russia did, the only way to go is up. As long as Russia keeps to herself and doesn’t involve itself in the affairs of others…they most certainly will improve things for their country. Again, Putin is not a hero nor a defender of western civilization. You mention Chechnya, but the reality is that all of the Caucasian and Central Asian republics were a part of the Soviet Empire, and this is the root cause of the problem. The people of Chechnya, Dagestan, and all the surrounding areas want full and complete independence from Russia. Russia needs to stay out of these regions (they can secure their borders) just as the US needs to stay out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Muslim countries. This is an example of Putin following in the footsteps of his Soviet predecessors…not doing the opposite.

    Your justification for Putin’s actions in Syria is no different than those who justify American actions in Saudi Arabia or the other GCC nations. Both the US and Russia are supporting criminal tyrants (whether the House of Saud or Bashar al-Assad). Both the US and Russia are supporting the current governments in Egypt and Afghanistan (with one being a military dictatorship and the other being a puppet government established by a foreign occupation) as another example.

    Syria has been oppressed for half a century by a dictatorship lead by a minority group (the Alawites). Yet, you believe in conspiracy theories regarding those who have risen up against him! The matter of Syria is clear, and there have been attempts going back to the 80s to remove the Assad dynasty from power. It is hypocritical to say that you believe in human freedom and to criticize the monarchies that once ruled over Europe, yet support dictators like those in Syria or Egypt. Russia under Putin is always looking for a way to undermine American interests by supporting other state powers. However, he doesn't care too much about who it is they are assisting as long as their own interests are met. This is why doing things just for your nation’s interests is not always right. Sometimes, it is immoral and corrupt…even if your own people voted for it. But I don’t really think the affairs of Syria or Libya concern the people of Russia (the same is true of Chechnya and the Russian people could live in a far more peaceful and secure life if their leader would end his aggressive policies towards former Russian colonies).

    With regards to Libya – the US and NATO did what they did because of the Arab Spring – in order to try and take advantage of the changing situation and be seen as assisting the people of these countries who were ready to rise up against those governments that had oppressed them for so long. Obviously they failed, but these are the simple reasons for those particular policies by the US, UK, and NATO.

    I do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

    As far as Crimea and Ukraine go, it would be better for the people of these nations if BOTH Russia and the US/NATO stayed out of their affairs. I understand that Crimea believes itself to be part of Russia (as well as the strategic advantage that Crimea gives the Russian military). But Crimea is an exception rather than a rule when it comes to these former Soviet Republics. All those who were once trapped by the Soviet Empire have a right to resist Russia now and be cautious of Russia (even if Putin claims to have begun a new era with regards to Russia’s relations with the rest of the world). It’s no different than the Muslim nations being cautious of any intervention by the US or Europe (particularly after centuries of colonialism). If Putin truly only cared about the interests of Russia and this ascendant middle class you mention, then there is no need to start taking back territory (even if that territory prefers to be a part of the Russian Federation like Crimea).

    It is human nature to want to dominate. I agree. But I disagree with putting your trust in democracy because this tyranny of the majority leads us to become enslaved by our desires. Particularly when the people know that they can simply vote themselves more money and more handouts from their state’s treasury! The cultural marxism that the author of the original article here complains about (and in my opinion, exaggerates) is a direct result of democracy. The things you mention with regards to crony-capitalism banksters and so forth…were empowered by (or took advantage of) democracy. If you got more money than the person next to you, you have a better chance at winning an election as compared to that other person. Multiply this several times over, include control of corporate mass media, and you can effectively exclude most candidates. It’s very difficult to challenge Putin in Russia today (and sure, that might be a good thing compared to what existed in Russia before…but it is not good enough) just as it is very difficult to challenge the two-party system in the US.

    I certainly agree that the imperialism and war crimes of the west (and in particular, their torturous prison camps) are far worse than anything Putin’s Russia is currently doing. However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza. Behind the scenes, the US and Russia work together when it comes to oppressing Muslims and preventing a united Muslim Khalifah (and I’m not talking about the one ISIS declared which was more of a power-grab meant to divide rather than unite the Muslim world). Afghanistan is the best proof of this, having endured a Soviet occupation, then an American and NATO occupation while Putin’s Russia recognized whatever puppet leader was installed in Kabul and gave conditional support to America’s war against the Taliban (a war it still hasn’t even come close to winning).

    With regards to Western Civilization, again immigration across the board (not just European) is what has led to today’s power and hegemony. It must be said that over the last few decades the West has become richer and more powerful than at any time in its history! This is after (not before) massive immigration from people all around the world. We can never discount the land stolen from the Native Americans; or the natural resources stolen from the Muslim world; or the role played by black slave labor in building the US (the most successful country in all of western civilization); or the role played today by illegal immigrants from Mexico in providing cheap labor; or the role played today by child labor in countries like China and Vietnam and so forth on behalf of western corporations; or all the foreigners (some of whom don’t even speak english) working in various university labs at the research level. Now I’m not taking anything away from all the European immigrants and the foundation they established for all of this…but let us be fair and honest. Right or wrong, this is the reality of contemporary western civilization, how it came to be, and why it is as rich and powerful as it is today. Nothing from Hitler, Canada, Putin, or Iceland can compare!

    You might argue that riches and material wealth and geopolitical domination are not what makes western civilization what it is, and that adherence to its underlying values is what it is most important in determining what western culture really is. But for those outside of the west...it is unmistakable to recognize the power and influence that western civilization now exerts over the rest of the world as well as the type of popular culture that it exports to the rest of the world. There is not a Bible or Torah or Quran or other Divine text that explains and sets such standards for what western society truly stands for. There are differing interpretations of each and every constitution found in the nations of the west. There are different shades and understanding of secularism. There are different arguments and debates regarding the limitations of such things as free expression and privacy. There are mixtures of how a democracy and a republic mix. Then of course are the endless disagreements and conflicts regarding the free-market system vs. centralized planning (along with everything in between). Realistically, the US has never had pure capitalism and the former Soviet Union never had pure marxism. It is a mixture of many different things instead (things that are often in chaos and conflict) - which ultimately defines western culture and civilization. That is very different from a specific creed, religion, or philosophy.


    ...when it is subverted and perverted by fiends to their own nefarious ends. Western civilization is in fact a good idea. It means the rule of law. It means the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment. It means the Magna Carta and the concept of democracy. It means reason and an exaltation of the human spirit in high art. It means a respect for the mind of man. It means above all, human freedom. These are good things. And worth preserving...
     
    This can be said about any nation, ideology, or civilization. Many nations and civilizations believe in the rule of law…but they differ with regards to what those laws should be. Without a doubt, there is a tremendous contradiction between Biblical cannon law and the types of laws that have become commonplace in western nations and western society through post-enlightenment secularism.

    Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, and something that is all too easy for those very “crony-capitalist bankers” to take advantage of and infiltrate (which is why earlier I mentioned that it is necessary to critique the foundational beliefs of western civilization in order to understand how these various groups or parties or special-interest lobbies successfully gained power). And I think I’ve already talked about human freedom as it relates to the security states of both the US and Russia. Other European nations (in particular the less powerful ones) are also falling into this on account of the blowback that has resulted from their own government’s policies in joining the UN, NATO, various other international organizations and security pacts (some exceptions of course exist like Greece). But what now exists thanks to technology has ensured that anyone and anything in western civilization can be monitored and spied on (just ask Edward Snowden). The very success of western civilization has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms. The very wars and conflicts that the western world has inflicted upon others, has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms.

    Going back to freedom from a theoretical viewpoint, it is important to remember that there is no such thing as absolute freedom (for that would be the law of the jungle). Don’t you see – it is this very concept, this very belief, this very dogma regarding a vague desire for comprehensive freedom…that has contributed to the corruption of the morals of so many people in western society. You have talked about the Zionists, Bankers, and others (and the author of the above article, Boyd, mentioned cultural marxism)…yet it is this very belief (that serves as one of the foundations for western civilization) which gives those groups and others such opportunity to take control. In other words, you enable them with your own hands and your own heart (even though your own eyes end up looking away and your own voices start to protest)!

    Lastly, with regards to your statements on Islam…that which you accuse Islam of has nothing to do with it. We are not even allowed to have sex before marriage, so how can rape be a part of our religion? In times of war, there may be certain exceptions regarding marriage…but even in this case it is done in a way superior to what any other nation or culture would do. No genocide, no refugee camps, no separating a mother from her children, and none of the despicable things we have seen done to us (like when Russians would rape Afghan women and then throw them out of their planes during the 80s Soviet occupation, or what we have seen the US do in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo and elsewhere). A man cannot have sexual relations with a woman unless he is willing to take care of her and be responsible for her (which is marriage in all cases except prisoners of war). That is the exact opposite of rape, casual sex, one-night stands, and what becomes of female prisoners of war by various countries today. There is a right way and a wrong way to approach war, deal with prisoners of war, and conquer others. Trust in the One who created you to inform you on the right way to do these things (and everything else). Don’t trust yourselves or your own reason and intellect…for satan is always looking to corrupt it and make a fool out of the creation.

    As you said in the beginning…it is human nature to dominate. As Muslims, we say: "We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator"! Western civilization is based on skepticism, Islam is based on unconditional faith. The truth is relative in the western way of thinking, while God is the absolute truth upon which all other truths are based on in Islam. We live for the Hereafter, not this life which is the opposite of what is advocated today in the various secular systems of western society. The Islamic system has certain good aspects of both capitalism and socialism without the bad of those systems. No paper currency (which is so easy to print and exploit). No interest or usury (which is how those very bankers and the institutions they serve gain so much power to begin with. Every human being has the right to food, shelter, and clothing (no one has the right to deny the poor these things even if it goes against some sort of personal theory against welfare states). Beyond the poor tax (and aside from the jizya tax), there are no additional taxes (the treasury of the state is filled by donations, war booty, and administering natural resources). The Earth’s resources do not belong to dictatorships nor to various companies and corporations. The natural resources belong to all the people of a nation and thus, they are administered by the leaders of that nation. No gambling, fornication, or alcohol (and since you mentioned rape, it must be stated that rape occurs the most in environments where there is alcohol and free-mixing between the sexes).

    There are no honor killings in Islam. This is something that occurs outside the laws and boundaries established by the Islamic Shariah, and is one of a great many things used as propaganda against Islam and Muslims. Honor killings are a violation of the Islamic Shariah and in reality, are a cultural phenomenon…one that must be destroyed. Just as you no longer believe in the lies and propaganda that mainstream media sources push to you…do not believe the lies and propaganda against Islam (for truly, much of both of these come from the same source)!

    You mentioned head-slicing (and in no way am I advocating anything that ISIS does for they have become a different sect far away from the pristine sources of Islam), but hasn’t that always been a constant of war? Beheadings were used in the American Revolutionary War against the British (as an example). And it still seems far more humane that the types of atrocities that occur in western p.o.w. camps. You will blame those of course on the zionists, bankers, and others …but from Germany to Serbia, it seems a bit more widespread than that! And since you brought up both rape and the skull tower of Serbs, we certainly can’t forget what drunken Serbs did in Bosnia…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2Q0ju8-yws


    If people in the West desire something more than what they have been told…if they desire something more spiritual and more moral and more fair and less secular and less corrupt and less gluttonous – they will find it in Islam. They are already finding it in Islam. Mankind’s desire is not only to dominate, but to find the truth and know the truth (and then to spread the truth). And once it comes to you…it touches you faster than the speed of light! And there is no going back.

    While Islam is being attacked by the West night and day in a time where the West has the overwhelming advantage in terms of economic power, media control, military power, soft power, firepower, etc…Islam has still managed to win converts (or reverts since we are all Muslim by birth…meaning we are all born upon “fitrah”), and grow in all corners of the various western nations (recall how many Russian Muslims there are without including the Tatars or the Muslim majorities that exist in the Caucasian Mountains and the Central Asian Republics outside of Russia). By contrast, when Europe had fully colonized the Muslim world (and again, they had the full advantage in terms of economic and military power)…the missionaries of the West were still unable to do much and failed in every attempt to bring Christianity into the hearts of the Muslim masses even though the Muslims were in a position of weakness and enslavement at that time.

    {They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords beside God, and they have taken the Messiah, son of Mary (as a god). Whereas they were not commanded but to worship the One God. There is no god but He. Pure is He from what they associate with Him. They would like to extinguish the light of God with their mouths. But even though the unbelievers detest it, God has decided to let His light shine forever. It is God Who sent His Messenger with guidance and a true religion that will prevail over all other religions…even though the polytheists hate it} Quran 9:31-33

    OK, here we go.. ; )

    When you fall down as hard as Russia did, the only way to go is up.

    You’re not giving Putin any credit. What he managed was a miracle. Russia was slated for eternal depravation and her resources looted for perpetuity by the International Oligarchs as the Russian people slipped away into the dust bin of obscurity and privation that they suffered under for so damn long.

    The people of Chechnya, Dagestan, and all the surrounding areas want full and complete independence from Russia. Russia needs to stay out of these regions (they can secure their borders) just as the US needs to stay out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Muslim countries.

    it is dishonest to pretend that Russia’s relationship with Chechnya is equal to the wars of aggression the US has waged on Iraq and others. Iraq is thousands of miles away from the US, whereas Chechnya is on Russia’s doorstep.

    Who is Ramzan Kadyrov? Isn’t he Putin’s good friend? Doesn’t he have like a thousand wives or something? Half of them teenagers?

    It would be better if we could cover a little less ground with these posts, then we might be able to flesh this stuff out a little better.

    Your justification for Putin’s actions in Syria is no different than those who justify American actions in Saudi Arabia or the other GCC nations. Both the US and Russia are supporting criminal tyrants (whether the House of Saud or Bashar al-Assad).

    OMG you’re one of those?!

    You too want to see Syria utterly destroyed by head slicers and cannibals funded by the Zionists and Sunnis because Assad is of the wrong tribe and tolerates Christians (infidels) in Syria?

    I have to admit it’s fascinating to hear at least someone try to make that case. I couldn’t believe that shit-bag Morsi as soon as he comes to power wants to align with the Zionists and destroy yet another Muslim country. What is it with you guys? You hate your brothers so much you’re all willing to toss the Palestinians under the Zionist boot so you can slice some of your fellow Muslim’s head’s off. I really don’t get it. Please help us all to understand this madness.

    , yet support dictators like those in Syria or Egypt

    From what I know about Assad is that like Gadaffi, he has kept the peace and tolerates Christians and others. I know when a vote was recently held that the people of Syria overwhelmingly voted to keep Assad in office. I also know many of the men trying to kill Assad are what I consider sub-human beasts. To whit :

    http://www.redstate.com/uploads/2014/09/syria-execution.jpg

    those men have been tortured

    it sickens me to think my tax dollars are going to human garbage like that

    And no, the US and NATO did not want to help the Libyan people. Please. They wanted to destroy Libya (and Gadhafi’s gold Dinar) just like they wanted to destroy Iraq and every other country that could be seen as a potential obstacle to Greater Israel.

    I do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

    http://www.altacocker.com/other_items/thermite/thermite_wtc-core-beam-cut.jpg

    we can discuss that elsewhere

    As far as Crimea and Ukraine go, it would be better for the people of these nations if BOTH Russia and the US/NATO stayed out of their affairs.

    sometime you seem to have no clue whatsoever. Russia was forced to respond to what the US and NATO were doing. They would be thrilled if the US would just stop fomenting wars. Putin and Russia only want trade and prosperity. These conflicts are being imposed on them. Are you too blinded by your tribal and religious resentments to see the obvious?

    However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza.

    What are you talking about? Russia is against the conflict in Syria. You have things ass-backwards my friend.

    As for the Taliban and other intrigues and conflicts in the region vis a vis Russia, Putin and Islam, I really don’t know enough about it all.

    With regards to Western Civilization, again immigration across the board (not just European) is what has led to today’s power and hegemony. It must be said that over the last few decades the West has become richer and more powerful than at any time in its history! This is after (not before) massive immigration from people all around the world. We can never discount the land stolen from the Native Americans; or the natural resources stolen from the Muslim world; or the role played by black slave labor in building the US (the most successful country in all of western civilization); or the role played today by illegal immigrants from Mexico in providing cheap labor; or the role played today by child labor in countries like China and Vietnam and so forth on behalf of western corporations; or all the foreigners (some of whom don’t even speak english) working in various university labs at the research level

    You know what this sounds like? The same pathetic tripe I hear all day long. ‘Whitey is evil and all his accomplishments are from non-white people who he’s exploited and he needs massive non-white immigration, blah, blah, *hurl* blah.

    Fuck all that.

    Like I said, I don’t know too much about the details on the ground over there in Russia vs. the Muslims. But what I can tell you, is that if the Muslim’s problem with Putin is that he doesn’t allow enough non-Russian immigration into Russia, then I stand 100% with Putin, and would tell all non-Russians to fuck the hell off. Russia, like Europe and the rest of the white countries have just as much right to maintain their ethnicity and culture and self-determination as anyone else. And anyone who thinks otherwise can suck an egg. Dry.

    for what western society truly stands for.

    At one time it stood for honor and truth and freedom for the people of Western society. Today it has been perverted and subverted to mean sodomy and pedastery and corruption of the human spirit.

    The very wars and conflicts that the western world has inflicted upon others, has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms.

    The recent wars you’re talking about are also inflicted upon the (now completely corrupted) western world. When the West was the West, we would have hanged by the neck every single politician who had betrayed their sacred oath to the Constitution and the people of the US. But today the west (especially in the US and England and France) are a rotted out corpse of what we once were. If we still had the spirit of the true West, that honored things like truth, we wouldn’t be waging wars based on lies. It wasn’t the wars that lead to our undoing, those were a consequence of having our spirit murdered by alien banksters who had taken the reins of our civilization and plunged us on the rocks of destruction.

    yet it is this very belief (that serves as one of the foundations for western civilization) which gives those groups and others such opportunity to take control.

    it wasn’t our belief in freedom that allowed these “other groups’ to take control. It was our suicidally insane immigration policy that allowed them to enter our societies and undermine them for their own tribal ends. The same kind of immigration madness you seem to be advocating.

    We are not even allowed to have sex before marriage, so how can rape be a part of our religion?

    um.. think about that for a second.

    and it doesn’t matter whether or not your religion permits rape, it’s enough that Muslims are raping school girls and young women at epidemic proportions in non-Muslim countries. Often gang rapes and there’s a whole sub-culture of Muslims that prey on these young girls and women.

    In times of war, there may be certain exceptions regarding marriage…but even in this case it is done in a way superior to what any other nation or culture would do.

    is this an attempt to try to justify rape? I guess because you’re in a perpetual state of war with the infidels that is permissible to rape their women. Since it is an act of war? WTF?

    A man cannot have sexual relations with a woman unless he is willing to take care of her and be responsible for her (which is marriage in all cases except prisoners of war). That is the exact opposite of rape,

    what about the prisoners of war? They’re OK to rape? It’s not “rape”?

    There is a right way and a wrong way to approach war, deal with prisoners of war, and conquer others.

    a right way to “conquer others”? really?!

    Trust in the One who created you to inform you on the right way to do these things (and everything else). Don’t trust yourselves or your own reason and intellect…

    You’re for real, aren’t you?

    As you said in the beginning…it is human nature to dominate. As Muslims, we say: “We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator”!

    *whooo*

    Islam is based on unconditional faith. The truth is relative in the western way of thinking, while God is the absolute truth upon which all other truths are based on in Islam.

    OK

    No interest or usury (which is how those very bankers and the institutions they serve gain so much power to begin with

    I agree with you there!

    And I’m sure there are very many beautiful and sublime tenants and truths in Islam. I respect all religions that are peaceful and humane. In so far as Islam is peaceful and respectful of other people’s right to their religious beliefs, then I say salam alaikum to them.

    However, as soon as they get some inkling that it’s their job to spread their Islamic “truths” by the sword (or immigration) into non-Islamic lands, (like they did at one time to Andalusia or more recently to Kosovo), then all my good will goes right out the window. And I become the flaming sword of the Western man’s Western blood and the vengeance of his fallen heroes and Saints. And all shall feel his terrible wrath.

    Other than that.. ; )

    It was fun my friend.

    There is much we can learn about each other’s cultures and ‘truths’.

    God bless

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Rurik – thank you for continuing our discussion, even though it sometimes gets very off-topic. However, the essence of this discussion still relates back to the confederate flag, southern culture and heritage, racism, and the topics that lie at the essence of the original commentary.

    Russian and American imperialism are very similar, even if one is worse than the other. Since both the US and Russia claim to be fighting a “war on terror” and in both cases, had occupation forces stationed in those countries, there is a similarity (between Iraq and Chechnya). Certainly, the destruction of Iraq exceeds that of what has been done in Chechnya since the primary aggressor there is Russia while in Iraq, the US has had a great many allies (the whole of the UN for a time in fact…including even Russia). As for Putin’s accomplishments, maybe he deserves some credit domestically. But beyond that, the best that can be said is that Putin is simply not over-reacting to the mistakes that the American Empire and NATO are making. This comes from the experience of Russia’s own failed empire more than anything else (just ask the Afghans). Oil plays a big role in Russia’s economy and its ability to stand back up after prior collapse. And there are many countries (including some in Europe) that can take care of their own people while not oppressing other nations or acting as an imperial power and playing the dirty game of global power. I think you should look to those nations as a better example of western civilization (you even mentioned some) instead of Russia.

    …You too want to see Syria utterly destroyed by head slicers and cannibals funded by the Zionists and Sunnis because Assad is of the wrong tribe and tolerates Christians (infidels) in Syria?...
     
    I would not even call the Zionists cannibals. This level of hatred and dehumanization only results from conspiracy theories and detachment from reality. I’m not saying that the anti-Assad rebels are angels by any means. But let us be fair in our criticisms. Otherwise, we cannot have an honest discussion of any kind. Head slicers are better than the mass-torture and barrel bombs that Assad’s regime is known for. Read the reports of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights as one example. And for your information, Assad’s intelligence has always cooperated with western intelligence when it comes to Islamist fighters. Assad is from a minority religion (not just a tribe or ethnic group) who empowers other minority groups by oppressing the majority. Christians who pay jizyah (which isn’t that much) have nothing to fear from an authentic Islamic State. It is wrong to say that a Sunni Muslim Emirate or Khalifah would get rid of or mass-murder all Christians. ISIS has many deviations with regards to Islamic Law and this is because they declared themselves as a Caliphate without the correct Islamic procedures – and if the foundation of something is incorrect, everything else will eventually fall into error. Assad has not had any success in stopping Zionism by the way. So let us see what happens when he is removed. Then, if another Saudi Arabia or another Turkey is created…I won’t argue with you that the Zionists did indeed fund the whole the anti-Assad resistance. But as of now, I maintain that it is a genuine Islamic Awakening and a general popular revolution against a Russian-supported dictator for which others around the world are trying to influence and hijack but do not control (take what recently happened with Division 30 as an example).

    With regards to Palestine…it is not an easy question. And don’t say that I want to cut off the heads of other Muslims as I do not support ISIS. One interesting thing that happened shortly after the declaration of the ISIS Khalifah was that Israel again attacked Gaza in brutal fashion. This self-declared Khalifah in Iraq was unable to assist them at all. Right now, guerilla warfare is the only way to resist stronger powers (whether the US in Iraq/Afghanistan, Russia in Chechnya, or Alawite-occupied Syria). It makes no sense to establish a state in such circumstances. Now tell me, particularly after the failure of the secular arab regimes in the 1967 war against Israel…is there any way to resist Israeli occupation aside from guerilla warfare (at the moment)? Since we both agree with regards to the extent of Zionist control of the US and other western countries…how do you propose to save the western world from this sort of ethnic/religious supremacist ideology? I don’t think raising or defending the confederate flag is going to do it (just to bring back some of the original topic/article into this discussion :).

    I agree that the US wants to destroy any nation that is an obstacle to Greater Israel, but the way in which this is done differs depending on who is in power. Democrats and liberals have a different way to approach the issue and protect Israel as compared to Republicans and conservatives. The same is true with regards to the different political parties within Israel (such as the Likud party vs. the Labor party). Remember Yitzhak Rabin and the price he paid for recognizing a Palestinian state. Obama has many of the same policies as Bush, but he also differs in approach and methodology though with the same hegemonic end-goal. During the Arab spring protests, we saw the corporate mainstream media try to paint those protests as protests for liberal democracy (which they certainly were not).

    For the sake of their own regional or special interests, the US would certainly the people of Libya and elsewhere to accept such a system while voting for leaders that are pro-west. But this is a fantasy and that is why such wishful thinking never came to pass. Even if you are right about Libya (remember, after Saddam’s defeat in Gulf War 2, Ghaddafi gave up his nuclear ambitions and his intelligence agency began cooperation with western intelligence agencies against the Islamist movement) that does not contradict with what I said. Even if the US wanted to get rid of Ghaddafi, that does not mean they are on the same side as the Muslims who want to get rid of Ghaddafi (for their own reasons). The world revolves around many different interests. And so, the competition that began a few years back is for influence and control over who comes to power in Libya, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere. Will it be those who support the west and thus, zionist control of the middle east? Or will it be the Muslims who look to re-establish the Khalifah ar-Rasheed that is capable of liberating Palestine and uniting the Muslims (and will certainly protect minorities and non-Muslim groups if those groups accept the authority of the Khalifah and are thus, subdued).

    Now, the US is bombing many of those very same rebels that you may (and many online conspiracy theorists) claim are funded by the Zionists. Does that make sense? Lastly, what is your take on the nuclear deal between the US and Iran (one that Obama defends, but republicans, conservatives, neo-conservatives, aipac, and supports of the likud party oppose)?

    “…However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza…”

    This comment of mine from before is in relation to the bombs that Assad has and the bombs he drops on his own people…bombs that are made in Russia, sent to Iran, and then sent to Syria (or even given directly)…

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/17/us-syria-russia-arms-idUSBREA0G0MN20140117

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-04-02/putin-defies-obama-in-syria-as-arms-fuel-assad-resurgence


    I never said any race is evil. All the white Muslims in the US, Europe, Russia, Turkey, Bosnia, and the various countries in the Caucasian Mountain Region - are all my brothers. I don’t see things from any racial or ethnic perspective. America (the modern-day equivalent of the Roman Empire) is a very diverse nation with many strengths and many great accomplishments. But also many crimes and transgressions, racism, and xenophobia. Ultimately, everything happens by the will of God, and all or our accomplishments could not exist without the permission of the Creator…for everything in the creation belongs to the Creator and not to us. The race-based outlook and perspective that you have is in my opinion, the real problem here. It taints your outlook and interpretation of events as they happen, or the comments of others, or the advice others may give. It is the elephant in the room whenever articles like the one Boyd has written here are brought up. My opinion is that Islam is the solution to this. And that solution applies to everyone – from Russia to Iraq and Syria to the Sudan to China.

    “…if the Muslim’s problem with Putin is that he doesn’t allow enough non-Russian immigration into Russia, then I stand 100% with Putin…”
     
    No. I’ve already explained the problem though. A point of research might be various youtube documentaries on the Chechen war.

    “…and it doesn’t matter whether or not your religion permits rape, it’s enough that Muslims are raping school girls and young women at epidemic proportions in non-Muslim countries. Often gang rapes and there’s a whole sub-culture of Muslims that prey on these young girls and women…”
     
    No. Rape (outside of war) is an attribute of those who permit sex outside of marriage. Most rapes that occur in the west generally, and the US in particular, are not committed by Muslims (yet, how come no one ever mentions the religion of those who do commit those rapes)! If a misguided Muslim who is acting in contradiction to his own religion commits a crime like rape…then when it is broadcast, his religion is mentioned. As for everyone else, it is just their name or sometimes their race (but not their religion). This is the injustice of western news reporting or the various anti-Muslim organizations that make money off of fear-mongering and Islamophobia (which also then serves as a foundation to justify the western wars of aggression that are taking place in the Muslim world today).

    Honor is found in getting married early and not committing sexual relations of any kind before marriage. Even then, a person of principle will not commit rape. Rape is one of the most exaggerated crimes in existence…particularly since the feminist movement takes advantage of this misinformation and turns the he-said she-said nature of such accusations into a political issue and agenda! Again, religious-based morals, strong family values, a society where as many of the people are provided for (rather than cut-throat capitalism), and where people are able to get married early and have respect for the institution of marriage…is what will truly nullify this real or imagined rape epidemic. And this is something all traditional, conservative movements as well as all the major religions of the world understand. Unfortunately, an attribute of western civilization is to replace reason with faith, to force religion to become private rather than public and communal, to support fanatical individualism and to protect free speech and the arts even when such things incite the worst impulses (sexual or otherwise) from within us. The result is free-mixing, dating, alcohol, intoxication, and so forth. This is the world that has come about post-enlightenment (not one that the Zionists created – though they certainly have taken advantage of it). From the Arab pagans to the culture of Ancient Rome, Ancient Persia, Ancient Greece, and from the lands of the Sodom/Gomora to the Island of Lesbos…this has all happened before. But…

    Prophet Muhammad (saaws) said: "There will always be a group among this Ummah (nation of believers), firm upon the truth, unharmed in their faith by those that oppose them"

    “…what about the prisoners of war? They’re OK to rape? It’s not “rape”…”
     
    In Islamic law, the only instance where it is permissible to have sex with someone other than your wife is when you take them as slaves when waging offensive (not defensive) war. I don’t consider this rape because such women are given food, shelter, and clothing (as are their children if they have any). This is only after you have given those whom you are fighting a chance to sign a peace treaty, disarm, and pay the jizya tax. And that only comes into play after you have gained complete authority over a land with a legitimate Khaliah (being able to defend your airspace is an important requisite for establishing authority). Non-Muslims are protected and can even administer their own laws (an option not even allowed in western states). But if a group of non-Muslims refuses to accept the authority of the Khaliah (which is formally done through paying jizyah) and insists on fighting it (as the only other option would be exile to a far off land)…then total war is waged on them. All their fighting men are killed. The elderly, women, and children are taken as slaves. This is only time instance where slavery is allowed in Islam (and even then, there is a way and procedure to end slavery…but so long as there is war and conflict, there will be slavery of one type or another). Rape is not allowed here because the women are provided for just like one would provide for his own wife. Have you ever seen a similar option for female prisoners of war or the widows of a nation those men have been killed off by others? Rather, rape is used by every other nation or culture during times of war as a weapon of war and it usually ends in killing the woman or she is left to a life of homelessness, poverty, handouts, refugee status, etc.

    This is the solution given to man by the Creator with regards to the specific problem of female prisoners of war and widows when you have gained authority and power in the land and are conquering others (more on the issue of conquering below). Again, this is not any type of war, but specific to wars of conquest to make the word of God the highest authority in the land. Either Monotheism is the highest authority, or polytheism is (as is the case today with America’s Empire, a resurgent Russia, and the system of International Law overseen by the United Nations). By contrast, the wives of those whom the US conquers or kills – are left as widows or placed in various prison camps (and we all know what goes on there). But you don’t here too much about it because anyone who is labelled as a “terrorist” is no longer considered a human being (in the western world today), and he is dehumanized to the point where you know nothing about his wife or kids or whatever. But, the Muslims are able to (or should be) take care of their women and the families of their martyrs and prisoners because their enemies (like the US are Russia) prefer to just drop bombs or conduct secret raids (which help populate various prison camps and black sites). No news coverage is given to all of these women and children who are harmed by this, and the US and its allies prefer their victims to remain hidden and unknown. In addition, since this is called a “war on terror”, there are no negotiations with “terrorists”. So how can there be the option of a peace treaty? Rather than conquering directly, what western nations are doing is giving support, funds, and arms to police states who conquer the indigenous people for them. Again, prison, rape, and torture becomes the way that these dictatorships maintain power. So compared to that, the Islamic way of war and conquest is truly humane and just. There is no “war on terror” or other silly acronyms in Islamic law. And we do not conquer or take slaves when fighting in defense of our lands and religion (which is clearly the case today).

    When Muslims conquer others (and all this that I’m talking about is theoretical again since such actions are conditional as I’ll explain further below), they are taking slaves only from those who are die-hard in their opposition to Islam and the authority of the Khalifah. They will never stop fighting against Islam – for otherwise they would have fled, signed a peace treaty, or payed jizya. If the US or Russia were to encounter an entire nation like this, they would like simply bomb everyone in it (like what happened in Nagasaki and Hiroshima even though in this case, the Japanese were ready to surrender). The slaves of a conquered nation will see that their leaders and fighting men lied to them, and that Islam is innocent of the many lies that were told to justify such an extreme position of fighting the Khalifah even when it has overpowered all other forms of authority in a specific region.

    Also, Islam encourages us to free all slaves eventually, but one cannot just assimilate a group that was in continuous war and unwilling to accept any sort of peace treaty nor pay a small tax for the protection of the Mujahideen. Again, this is all specific to circumstances that do not exist right now. But if a non-Muslim nation or group agrees to pays the jizyah…it becomes an obligation on the Mujahideen to protect them and fight against any who attacks them (even if they are a people who are drowning in sins and polytheism). So before you think of any accusation here, remember this; remember that an Islamic Khalifah is willing to fight on behalf of non-Muslim groups and minorities and their women and children regardless of how unjust we believe their culture and objects of worship are. Non-Muslim minorities in an Islamic State are a free and protected group…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb7xKC1Ttoo

    “…a right way to “conquer others”? really?!...”
     
    Yes, because the reality is that one is either conquered or does the conquering. The various countries of the Muslim world and larger third world today exist as they do because Europe successfully conquered them over the last few centuries. The US and Russia continued upon that path. Didn’t you say earlier that it is mankind’s nature to dominate? Ultimately, someone is in charge. Yes, there can be peace treaties and thereafter, mutual trade and so forth. But any reasonably sized global power exists because it has conquered others. The US today would not exist with having conquered the Native Americans, Spanish forces and Mexicans, and the British who were deemed occupiers. And this is true of ANY empire, regional power, global power, or civilization. I’m not talking about individual nations, so don’t confuse the two.

    Now realistically, we are not going to have any one power that rules every inch of the globe – at least not yet. Technologically, the foundation for such a future one-world government and currency is being put into place – but that doesn’t mean it will ever get off the ground. Realistically, we as Muslims know that the Islamic Khailfah will not conquer the entire world…at least until the return of Jesus a.s. and the defeat of the anti-Christ as well as Yajuj and Majuj. Thus, power today as was the case yesterday is decentralized (and as a whole, that is for the better by the will of Allah). God allows us to see and witness different groups to know the truth from falsehood. One group of people will be checked by another (and so forth). The point to remember here is that the entire Muslim world is being ruled by unIslamic leaders and dictators who are supported by various powers outside the Muslim world (America, Europe, Russia). The issue not about conquering or taking slaves or anything like that. The Muslims in general, and the Mujahideen in particular are fighting in defense of their lands, their people, their prisoners, their natural resources (which are the richest in the world), and their religion. Unlike western civilization, we do not separate faith and state. After the righteous Khalifah is restored and the lands return to Islam, then we will call others to Islam. And if a state (let’s take Russia for example) prevents the call of Islam or prevents those from that state who want to accept Islam from migrating to the Khaliah…then war is declared (and this becomes a war of conquest rather a defensive war). So lets say that tomorrow all the Muslim countries have been liberated and a Khalifah is re-established to unite most or all of the Muslims. At that point, the Khalifa will call the people of Russia to Islam, and we will use logical arguments and debate and other types of dawah to introduce Islam to the people of Russia (taking them out of the worship of creation and to the worship of the Creator). If this is suppressed by Russia, or if Russia prevents any of its citizens from leaving in order live under Islam, then the Khalifah may declare war on Russia until it is subdued and pays the jizyah. At that point, protecting the people of Russia becomes the responsibility of the Khalifah, and the people of Russia do not have to change their culture or convert to Islam or anything like that. Their women are for them, not us. This only changes if they insist on having power and authority over the Khalifah (as opposed to vice versa). I’ve already explained what happens then.

    This is just an example to explain the concept as well as procedure. The problem with ISIS is that they are far removed (and probably ignorant of) the entire procedure. All of the scholars of the Mujahideen have rejected ISIS. But as for the hypothetical idea that Islam will conquer the whole world…we don’t believe this will happen from a practical standpoint. Rather, we believe that events will continue to occur where various wars and conflicts of different types will happen. Then, the anti-Christ will appear and this will be the most severe of trials. The anti-christ will use the djinn to make people believe that he can resurrect the dead (for example). He will have control over the world. His defeat will convince the people of the world that Islam is the truth (as opposed to a Khaliah conquering every inch of the earth). That is when (for a time) the whole world will be Muslim, and a golden age for mankind will begin!

    I hope that this wasn’t too long of an explanation (as it encompasses many different things, but things that have to be mentioned in order to understand the complete context of what the process and procedure of an Islamic Empire is). Today, there is no Islamic Empire. The Soviet Empire has fallen (and before that, the British Empire fell). The American Empire is alive and well, with China slowly advancing to a similar status sometime in the future.

    …In so far as Islam is peaceful and respectful of other people’s right to their religious beliefs, then I say salam alaikum to them…”
     
    {There shall be no compulsion in religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in taaghut and believes in Allah - has grasped the most trustworthy handhold which will never break. And Allah is all-Hearing, all-Knowing} Quran 2:256

    No one can be forced into Islam. It is not allowed in our religion to force anyone to convert. But our religion is one and the same as a state, and so we are to establish an Islamic State and that State is to be a world power, with no greater authority or system of governance. No power (like the US or the UN or China or India or whoever) should have power over the Muslims. All wars and conflicts throughout history are connected in some way to a desire for power. So you either take power, or are overtaken by someone else’s power. What you have said to me about those who have hijacked western civilization and imposed the wars that are going right now upon the people of the west…they are the ones who have overtaken you in power. Our creed, from God almighty, explains this and warns against this and makes it clear then that we either accept the need to gain power, or we will fall and become subjects to the power of others (which is the case today with regards to all of the Muslim lands).

    Prophet Muhammad (saaws) said: "A time will come when the nations (of the world) will surround you from every side, just as gluttons gather around the main dish." Somebody asked, 'Oh Messenger of Allah, will it be on account of our fewness in numbers at that time?' He (saaws) said, "Nay, that day you shall be numerous, but you will be like the foam and scum of the sea, and Allah will take the fear of you away from your enemies...and will place weakness into your hearts." Somebody asked: "What is this weakness?" He (saaws) said: "The love of the world and hatred of death." (Ahmad, Abu Dawud)

    Work in your way to take back power from those whom you believe have taken it, while the Muslims work in their own way to take back power. But I don’t want to continue this discussion without reminding you of the first and foremost obligation here (which has nothing to do with anything discussed in relation to politics, war, or similar issues). From an individual perspective (rather than a communal perspective), you must remember that Paradise is one’s final destination, and the way to reach it is through pure Monotheism (believing and worshiping God without any partners or rivals or associates or intermediaries, etc.).

    All of mankind are from Adam and Eve, and so we are all brothers and sisters in faith regardless of our race, skin pigmentation, language, culture, ethnicity, tribe, nationality, geographic birthplace, wealth, gender, abilities, intelligence, looks, etc. The ones who break this bond and this brotherhood…are those who love the worldly life more than the Hereafter; those whose pride and arrogance cause them to raise the flags of their forefathers even when they know in their hearts that it is wrong. This earth belongs to our Creator. To Him (The Most High, the Most Unique, the Most Transcendent) belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth.
  82. @Bliss

    And that rebel flag just might be a symbol of those, especially hated Southern, working class white folks, who tho they may have no animosity towards anyone of any race,
     
    How can you say that with a straight face? Their words and actions loudly announce their racial animosities to the whole world.

    If you fly the confederate or nazi flags you are proudly telling the world that you agree with the founding principles of the Confederacy or the Third Reich. So don't act surprised when there is a hostile reaction from those who deem those principles to be evil.

    As for Thomas Jefferson, he had a sexual affair and 4 children with his black slave Sally Hemings. He translated a book of his good friend Count Volney the french philosopher, historian, abolitionist who espoused views that would be called afrocentrist today:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantin_Fran%C3%A7ois_de_Chasseb%C5%93uf,_comte_de_Volney

    What does that tell you?




    And as for Abraham Lincoln, isn't he the arch enemy to you confederate flag wavers? It must really burn you up inside to see how mainstream America considers him the greatest of all the Presidents. Well, he sure didn't look like a WASP did he? That's because he must have had some african and some native american ancestors. Likely, he was a melungeon:

    https://www.google.com/search?q=melungeon&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=595&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMIt5eEyt2OxwIV0TiICh0Seg-a

    Why do you hate white folks Bliss?

    Did a white girl snub you?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss
    The majority of whites do not subscribe to your views. Many whites hate your kind. Remember: the Confederacy and the Third Reich did not survive for long. They weren't crushed by non-whites, were they?
  83. @Sonic
    Rurik – When you fall down as hard as Russia did, the only way to go is up. As long as Russia keeps to herself and doesn’t involve itself in the affairs of others…they most certainly will improve things for their country. Again, Putin is not a hero nor a defender of western civilization. You mention Chechnya, but the reality is that all of the Caucasian and Central Asian republics were a part of the Soviet Empire, and this is the root cause of the problem. The people of Chechnya, Dagestan, and all the surrounding areas want full and complete independence from Russia. Russia needs to stay out of these regions (they can secure their borders) just as the US needs to stay out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Muslim countries. This is an example of Putin following in the footsteps of his Soviet predecessors…not doing the opposite.

    Your justification for Putin’s actions in Syria is no different than those who justify American actions in Saudi Arabia or the other GCC nations. Both the US and Russia are supporting criminal tyrants (whether the House of Saud or Bashar al-Assad). Both the US and Russia are supporting the current governments in Egypt and Afghanistan (with one being a military dictatorship and the other being a puppet government established by a foreign occupation) as another example.

    Syria has been oppressed for half a century by a dictatorship lead by a minority group (the Alawites). Yet, you believe in conspiracy theories regarding those who have risen up against him! The matter of Syria is clear, and there have been attempts going back to the 80s to remove the Assad dynasty from power. It is hypocritical to say that you believe in human freedom and to criticize the monarchies that once ruled over Europe, yet support dictators like those in Syria or Egypt. Russia under Putin is always looking for a way to undermine American interests by supporting other state powers. However, he doesn't care too much about who it is they are assisting as long as their own interests are met. This is why doing things just for your nation’s interests is not always right. Sometimes, it is immoral and corrupt…even if your own people voted for it. But I don’t really think the affairs of Syria or Libya concern the people of Russia (the same is true of Chechnya and the Russian people could live in a far more peaceful and secure life if their leader would end his aggressive policies towards former Russian colonies).

    With regards to Libya – the US and NATO did what they did because of the Arab Spring – in order to try and take advantage of the changing situation and be seen as assisting the people of these countries who were ready to rise up against those governments that had oppressed them for so long. Obviously they failed, but these are the simple reasons for those particular policies by the US, UK, and NATO.

    I do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

    As far as Crimea and Ukraine go, it would be better for the people of these nations if BOTH Russia and the US/NATO stayed out of their affairs. I understand that Crimea believes itself to be part of Russia (as well as the strategic advantage that Crimea gives the Russian military). But Crimea is an exception rather than a rule when it comes to these former Soviet Republics. All those who were once trapped by the Soviet Empire have a right to resist Russia now and be cautious of Russia (even if Putin claims to have begun a new era with regards to Russia’s relations with the rest of the world). It’s no different than the Muslim nations being cautious of any intervention by the US or Europe (particularly after centuries of colonialism). If Putin truly only cared about the interests of Russia and this ascendant middle class you mention, then there is no need to start taking back territory (even if that territory prefers to be a part of the Russian Federation like Crimea).

    It is human nature to want to dominate. I agree. But I disagree with putting your trust in democracy because this tyranny of the majority leads us to become enslaved by our desires. Particularly when the people know that they can simply vote themselves more money and more handouts from their state’s treasury! The cultural marxism that the author of the original article here complains about (and in my opinion, exaggerates) is a direct result of democracy. The things you mention with regards to crony-capitalism banksters and so forth…were empowered by (or took advantage of) democracy. If you got more money than the person next to you, you have a better chance at winning an election as compared to that other person. Multiply this several times over, include control of corporate mass media, and you can effectively exclude most candidates. It’s very difficult to challenge Putin in Russia today (and sure, that might be a good thing compared to what existed in Russia before…but it is not good enough) just as it is very difficult to challenge the two-party system in the US.

    I certainly agree that the imperialism and war crimes of the west (and in particular, their torturous prison camps) are far worse than anything Putin’s Russia is currently doing. However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza. Behind the scenes, the US and Russia work together when it comes to oppressing Muslims and preventing a united Muslim Khalifah (and I’m not talking about the one ISIS declared which was more of a power-grab meant to divide rather than unite the Muslim world). Afghanistan is the best proof of this, having endured a Soviet occupation, then an American and NATO occupation while Putin’s Russia recognized whatever puppet leader was installed in Kabul and gave conditional support to America’s war against the Taliban (a war it still hasn’t even come close to winning).

    With regards to Western Civilization, again immigration across the board (not just European) is what has led to today’s power and hegemony. It must be said that over the last few decades the West has become richer and more powerful than at any time in its history! This is after (not before) massive immigration from people all around the world. We can never discount the land stolen from the Native Americans; or the natural resources stolen from the Muslim world; or the role played by black slave labor in building the US (the most successful country in all of western civilization); or the role played today by illegal immigrants from Mexico in providing cheap labor; or the role played today by child labor in countries like China and Vietnam and so forth on behalf of western corporations; or all the foreigners (some of whom don’t even speak english) working in various university labs at the research level. Now I’m not taking anything away from all the European immigrants and the foundation they established for all of this…but let us be fair and honest. Right or wrong, this is the reality of contemporary western civilization, how it came to be, and why it is as rich and powerful as it is today. Nothing from Hitler, Canada, Putin, or Iceland can compare!

    You might argue that riches and material wealth and geopolitical domination are not what makes western civilization what it is, and that adherence to its underlying values is what it is most important in determining what western culture really is. But for those outside of the west...it is unmistakable to recognize the power and influence that western civilization now exerts over the rest of the world as well as the type of popular culture that it exports to the rest of the world. There is not a Bible or Torah or Quran or other Divine text that explains and sets such standards for what western society truly stands for. There are differing interpretations of each and every constitution found in the nations of the west. There are different shades and understanding of secularism. There are different arguments and debates regarding the limitations of such things as free expression and privacy. There are mixtures of how a democracy and a republic mix. Then of course are the endless disagreements and conflicts regarding the free-market system vs. centralized planning (along with everything in between). Realistically, the US has never had pure capitalism and the former Soviet Union never had pure marxism. It is a mixture of many different things instead (things that are often in chaos and conflict) - which ultimately defines western culture and civilization. That is very different from a specific creed, religion, or philosophy.


    ...when it is subverted and perverted by fiends to their own nefarious ends. Western civilization is in fact a good idea. It means the rule of law. It means the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment. It means the Magna Carta and the concept of democracy. It means reason and an exaltation of the human spirit in high art. It means a respect for the mind of man. It means above all, human freedom. These are good things. And worth preserving...
     
    This can be said about any nation, ideology, or civilization. Many nations and civilizations believe in the rule of law…but they differ with regards to what those laws should be. Without a doubt, there is a tremendous contradiction between Biblical cannon law and the types of laws that have become commonplace in western nations and western society through post-enlightenment secularism.

    Democracy is the tyranny of the majority, and something that is all too easy for those very “crony-capitalist bankers” to take advantage of and infiltrate (which is why earlier I mentioned that it is necessary to critique the foundational beliefs of western civilization in order to understand how these various groups or parties or special-interest lobbies successfully gained power). And I think I’ve already talked about human freedom as it relates to the security states of both the US and Russia. Other European nations (in particular the less powerful ones) are also falling into this on account of the blowback that has resulted from their own government’s policies in joining the UN, NATO, various other international organizations and security pacts (some exceptions of course exist like Greece). But what now exists thanks to technology has ensured that anyone and anything in western civilization can be monitored and spied on (just ask Edward Snowden). The very success of western civilization has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms. The very wars and conflicts that the western world has inflicted upon others, has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms.

    Going back to freedom from a theoretical viewpoint, it is important to remember that there is no such thing as absolute freedom (for that would be the law of the jungle). Don’t you see – it is this very concept, this very belief, this very dogma regarding a vague desire for comprehensive freedom…that has contributed to the corruption of the morals of so many people in western society. You have talked about the Zionists, Bankers, and others (and the author of the above article, Boyd, mentioned cultural marxism)…yet it is this very belief (that serves as one of the foundations for western civilization) which gives those groups and others such opportunity to take control. In other words, you enable them with your own hands and your own heart (even though your own eyes end up looking away and your own voices start to protest)!

    Lastly, with regards to your statements on Islam…that which you accuse Islam of has nothing to do with it. We are not even allowed to have sex before marriage, so how can rape be a part of our religion? In times of war, there may be certain exceptions regarding marriage…but even in this case it is done in a way superior to what any other nation or culture would do. No genocide, no refugee camps, no separating a mother from her children, and none of the despicable things we have seen done to us (like when Russians would rape Afghan women and then throw them out of their planes during the 80s Soviet occupation, or what we have seen the US do in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo and elsewhere). A man cannot have sexual relations with a woman unless he is willing to take care of her and be responsible for her (which is marriage in all cases except prisoners of war). That is the exact opposite of rape, casual sex, one-night stands, and what becomes of female prisoners of war by various countries today. There is a right way and a wrong way to approach war, deal with prisoners of war, and conquer others. Trust in the One who created you to inform you on the right way to do these things (and everything else). Don’t trust yourselves or your own reason and intellect…for satan is always looking to corrupt it and make a fool out of the creation.

    As you said in the beginning…it is human nature to dominate. As Muslims, we say: "We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator"! Western civilization is based on skepticism, Islam is based on unconditional faith. The truth is relative in the western way of thinking, while God is the absolute truth upon which all other truths are based on in Islam. We live for the Hereafter, not this life which is the opposite of what is advocated today in the various secular systems of western society. The Islamic system has certain good aspects of both capitalism and socialism without the bad of those systems. No paper currency (which is so easy to print and exploit). No interest or usury (which is how those very bankers and the institutions they serve gain so much power to begin with. Every human being has the right to food, shelter, and clothing (no one has the right to deny the poor these things even if it goes against some sort of personal theory against welfare states). Beyond the poor tax (and aside from the jizya tax), there are no additional taxes (the treasury of the state is filled by donations, war booty, and administering natural resources). The Earth’s resources do not belong to dictatorships nor to various companies and corporations. The natural resources belong to all the people of a nation and thus, they are administered by the leaders of that nation. No gambling, fornication, or alcohol (and since you mentioned rape, it must be stated that rape occurs the most in environments where there is alcohol and free-mixing between the sexes).

    There are no honor killings in Islam. This is something that occurs outside the laws and boundaries established by the Islamic Shariah, and is one of a great many things used as propaganda against Islam and Muslims. Honor killings are a violation of the Islamic Shariah and in reality, are a cultural phenomenon…one that must be destroyed. Just as you no longer believe in the lies and propaganda that mainstream media sources push to you…do not believe the lies and propaganda against Islam (for truly, much of both of these come from the same source)!

    You mentioned head-slicing (and in no way am I advocating anything that ISIS does for they have become a different sect far away from the pristine sources of Islam), but hasn’t that always been a constant of war? Beheadings were used in the American Revolutionary War against the British (as an example). And it still seems far more humane that the types of atrocities that occur in western p.o.w. camps. You will blame those of course on the zionists, bankers, and others …but from Germany to Serbia, it seems a bit more widespread than that! And since you brought up both rape and the skull tower of Serbs, we certainly can’t forget what drunken Serbs did in Bosnia…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2Q0ju8-yws


    If people in the West desire something more than what they have been told…if they desire something more spiritual and more moral and more fair and less secular and less corrupt and less gluttonous – they will find it in Islam. They are already finding it in Islam. Mankind’s desire is not only to dominate, but to find the truth and know the truth (and then to spread the truth). And once it comes to you…it touches you faster than the speed of light! And there is no going back.

    While Islam is being attacked by the West night and day in a time where the West has the overwhelming advantage in terms of economic power, media control, military power, soft power, firepower, etc…Islam has still managed to win converts (or reverts since we are all Muslim by birth…meaning we are all born upon “fitrah”), and grow in all corners of the various western nations (recall how many Russian Muslims there are without including the Tatars or the Muslim majorities that exist in the Caucasian Mountains and the Central Asian Republics outside of Russia). By contrast, when Europe had fully colonized the Muslim world (and again, they had the full advantage in terms of economic and military power)…the missionaries of the West were still unable to do much and failed in every attempt to bring Christianity into the hearts of the Muslim masses even though the Muslims were in a position of weakness and enslavement at that time.

    {They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords beside God, and they have taken the Messiah, son of Mary (as a god). Whereas they were not commanded but to worship the One God. There is no god but He. Pure is He from what they associate with Him. They would like to extinguish the light of God with their mouths. But even though the unbelievers detest it, God has decided to let His light shine forever. It is God Who sent His Messenger with guidance and a true religion that will prevail over all other religions…even though the polytheists hate it} Quran 9:31-33

    As Muslims, we say: “We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator”!

    The act of worship that defines Islam is prostrating to the Kaaba 5 times a day. Here is the Kaaba:

    http://almiskeenah.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/changing-kiswa-1432c.jpg

    Is that the Creator? GTFO…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Bliss - we pray five times a day to the Creator, not to the Kabbah. We pray in the direction of the Kabbah (called Qiblah) so that any Muslim no matter where he is in the world is praying in the same direction. The prayer is not to the Kabbah nor do we give the Kabbah any sort of divine properties or attributes.

    If you think about, what you are actually implying here can be applied to any house of worship within any religion in any part of the world. Are mosques, churches, and synagogues places of worship or objects of worship? After answering this (truthfully), apply the same to the direction of worship (like the Muslim Qiblah) as well as pilgrimage sites, graveyards, places where religious festivals are held, and so forth. Are we not to have mosques, churches, synagogues, and various religious symbols just because those outside of a faith may mistakenly believe that we are worshiping those symbols or those constructions (rather than God), even though there is no truth to this?

    Every Masjid (including Masjid al-Harem where the Kabbah is located) and every Muslim home is a house of worship. We do not worship the house...we worship the One who created those houses (as well as everything else in existence; everything in space and time).

    One of the most important verses of the Quran is Ayatul-Kursi...so listen to it and tell me how could one confuse the Creator of the Kabba with the Kabba (or any other earthly construction) after hearing, reciting, and understanding this...

    {God is He besides Whom there is no god, the Ever-living, the Self-subsisting by Whom all subsist; slumber does not overtake Him nor sleep; whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is His; who is he that can intercede with Him but by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them, and they cannot comprehend anything out of His knowledge except what He pleases, His knowledge extends over the heavens and the earth, and the preservation of them both tires Him not, and He is the Most High, the Great} Quran 2:255

    Other important Quranic verses in the context of this discussion...

    {He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. He has made you and the cattle in pairs and multiplied you by His creation. There is certainly nothing like Him. He is the all-Hearing and all-Aware} Quran 42:11

    {And from among God’s signs are the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. Do not bow down in worship to the sun or to the moon, but bow down to the God who created them, if it is truly Him you serve} (Quran 41:37

    Also, take note of this narration from Prophet Muhammad (saaws)...

    Abdulla bin Umar said: I saw the Prophet doing tawwaf around the Ka’aba saying “How sweet and good are you and how sweet is your scent. How great are you and how great is your sanctity. But by the One who has the soul of Mohammad is in His Hand (meaning - God), the sanctity of a believer is greater with God than your sanctity” (Ibn Maja)

    More complete response...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhtdOf_d3hM

    Further information...

    http://www.answering-christianity.com/black_stone.htm

    Significance of the Kabbah...

    http://www.speakingtree.in/blog/the-kaabasignificance-and-what-is-in-it

    Miracles of the Kabbah (but remember that a miracle is not something that you worship...you only worship the Creator who is responsible for the miracle) by non-Muslims I believe...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7n6gyzmYDw

    Some unknown facts about the Kabbah...

    http://muslimmatters.org/2012/11/15/ten-things-you-didnt-know-about-the-kaaba/

    And in particular, note that a sect of Ishmailies actually attacked the Kabbah and took the black stone from it which was broken and split into a number of few pieces (eventually returned to the Abassid Khalifah). More...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypopu6UD-xo

    If we thought Allah was in the Kabbah, then this act would have been the end of Islam. So let us be real and honest. Address the beliefs of other religions as those who adhere to those religions believe (and not what one has mistaken to assume based on rumors, gossip, conspiracy theories, or false accusations…all of which the Internet is a refuge for).

    Finally, we believe that the Kabbah will be destroyed eventually (as one of the signs of the end-times). You can search the “signs of qiyamah” in order to find ahadith reference. This and everything else I've stated above should suffice as proof that we do NOT worship the Kabbah in any way, shape, or form.
  84. @Anonymous
    Hmm, nobody here seems to be distinguishing between endorsement of the battle flag by private citizens, on the one hand, and by state governments on the other, at taxpayers' expense. Also, nobody mentions the crucial matter of _when_ the battle flag was first hoisted over three southern state capitols. It was in the early sixties, as a symbol of massive resistance to the Civil Rights movement. It was hate, not heritage. Or rather, hate _was_ the heritage.

    I'm a white southerner, from a rural working-class family, born in 1954, the year of Brown vs The Board of Education. Almost all of my adult relatives heaped contempt upon their black neighbors at every opportunity. It was an article of faith that had to be constantly reaffirmed. My grandfather enjoyed telling stories of the lynchings he had witnessed as a boy. --It was (and still is) a pathology that traces back to Reconstruction days, when suddenly poor whites lost their legal and social "superiority" to blacks. This was a huge psychic trauma for them, a disaster for their precarious self-esteem, and their descendents carried the resentful scars long after the historical details had faded. My uneducated relatives didn't know the history; they simply _were_ the history. And when the Civil Rights era rolled around, they fell back in love with the Stars & Bars--which at that point had been relegated mostly to museums for many decades. But now it appeared in the windows of houses and shops.

    I’m afraid you’re simply wrong in your basic premise that the Confederate Battle
    Flag was raised “as a massive symbol of resistance to the civil rights movement.” It was raised, not as a symbol of “racism” or “oppression,” but in commemoration of the centennial of he War Between the States. If you don’t believe me, go back and read the resolutions that officially put them in place. From Alabama to Georgia and every Southern State in between that chose to honor the Confederacy with this symbol, it was done as a commemoration of their State’s role in the Confederacy, and nothing else. Now the Southern People, however, the people whom you seem to want to portray as pellagra ridden, dirt floor cabin dwellers who were too ignorant to understand anything but the most base forms of hatred for their fellow man; well, I guess you’ll just have to mark that up to the trashy family that it was your sorry luck to be born into, because the South I grew up in didn’t wasn’t anything like that. I was born in 1947, one of the first “baby boomers” in Lauderdale County, Alabama. I grew up in a Christian family of 3 boys and 5 girls, and it may astound you to find out that we had wood floors and electricity and a big Zenith black dial table top radio. This radio was our window to the world, which my Momma and Daddy would use to listen to the local news and the events of the world. It may also astound you that, almost every weekend, the black family from down the road, (our closest neighbors), would come and listen to the “Grand Ole’ Opry” and “News Around The Globe” with us. It may also deflate your hatred to know that this very same black family worked right beside us in the cotton fields, picking cotton. You see, both of our families were sharecroppers working the same man’s land, and from what I could tell, when it come time to weigh our crops, both Mr. Edwards, the father of the black family, and my Daddy got paid the same amount for the same weight of cotton. Though Mr. Edwards 3 girls did raise a truck patch for themselves to make extra money. They went to a different church than we did, but it wasn’t because they were black, it was because they were Baptist and we were Church of Christ. If they had wanted to attend our church, I know they would have been more than welcome. You are trying to paint the entire Southland with the dirty paint from your tainted families pot and that’s just not right. I didn’t grow up the way you described, hating black people and talking about lynchings. I grew up with my head bobbing up and down in the cotton fields under the hot autumn sun right beside my black neighbors.
    Were there differences? Yes, of course their were. We knew there was a line socially and culturally not to be crossed, but it was a line drawn by both sides, both black and white, and it was a boundary easily and freely kept. It didn’t interfere with our families helping each other, or going fishing or swimming together. It’s just the way things were at the time.
    You say that your “uneducated relatives didn’t know the history,” regarding the Confederacy and the Confederate flag. I find that VERY hard to believe. From the time I was old enough to walk, I was told stories about our Confederate heroes like Patrick Cleburne and Stonewall Jackson, as well as the exploits of my own family members who served, (my Great Granddaddy served in the 16th Alabama infantry, Company C), and fought all over the South during the war, and I was, and am, extremely proud of that fact. The point I’m making is that, any boy raised up from after the war to at least the 1980′s knew by heart the great battles and the heroic Southern men who fought in them. It was just part of being a boy in the South. If your family didn’t know it’s history, and spent it’s time hating blacks and revering lynchings, don’t try to make that sickness out to be a representation of the whole South. That’s your cross to bear, not the South’s.
    When the civil rights struggle started, the Southern people who you try to portray as backward and inherently “racist” were in reality neither one. The Southern people realized that the federal government had far overstepped it’s bounds in interfering with the way the Sovereign States handled their social and cultural matters. The people of the State of Alabama, both black and white, had voted and decreed that “separate but equal” was going to be law of the land. The federal government had no Constitutional right to interfere in that decision. When the president illegally decided to send federal troops into the South to defy Alabama law, the people, knowing their history, and knowing that this was a profound and egregious encroachment upon the rights of the States, began to fly the Battle Flag as a symbol of defiance and resistance to the tyranny of the federal government. It was never used as a symbol of so called “racism.”
    Who is to blame for using the Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of “racism?” Does it really matter? Every person is going to make of the flag what he will, no power on earth can change that. For me, the Confederate Battle Flag will always stand as a proud symbol of the defense of home and family against overwhelming odds, and of heroism in battle, and honor, and duty, and, most especially the everlasting defiance of tyranny. What everyone else makes out of it, well, that’s up to them. They can follow the truth of history, or they can follow a narrative of lies. In the end, it still comes down to what each individual thinks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    I agree with a lot of what you said, but this,

    "The people of the State of Alabama, both black and white, had voted and decreed that “separate but equal” was going to be law of the land."

    doesn't make sense historically.
    , @iffen
    I am less than 3 years younger than you and I don't agree with some of what you have to say.

    We never had separate but equal; we had separate but unequal. Separate but equal has never been tried.

    If you can't remember that then you are not trying very hard.

    For example, take the Montgomery bus boycott. It wasn't just the fact that whites and blacks had different sections in which to sit, it also was the fact that blacks had to give up their seats when the white section filled up.
  85. @5371
    Do you have any idea how many different nationalities live in Dagestan, all ready to fight each other at the drop of a hat?

    5371 – Nothing like having a common enemy to unite you though – which is what Russia may become if their expansion into the Ukraine is repeated elsewhere. But this does not mean I support the expansion of the US or NATO.

    I’m not sure if it is in this thread or the various articles by Patrick Cockburn, but I have always maintained that European colonialism did not create divisions in the Muslim countries and third-world countries but rather, exploited and made worse those divisions. The same can be said about Russia’s long imperial history.

    It is sad and regrettable that this exists in so many parts of the world and in so many places including Dagestan (as you point out). But whether it is the topic of Boyd’s article here and the divisions between northern idealism and southern culture within the US, or the racial conflict in the US, or wars between monarchies in Europe, or differences between ethnic groups, tribes, and nationalities elsewhere…I oppose all of it. I oppose nationalism in every sense of its being…whether east or west, indigenous or imposed (with alot of contemporary nationalism in the middle east imposed by european colonialism).

    What I’ve written in my responses here to Rurik is my attempt to provide a solution. It is easy to criticize anything and everything, but much more difficult to stand for something. Still, it is the least I can do. We are all children of God (the Most High, the Most Unique, the Most Transcendent). We are all of the lineage and bloodline of Adam (as) and Eve (ra). We should be brothers and sisters in the worship of God – not associating any partners or rivals or intermediaries with God (who is separate, distinct, above, and unlike that which is created). That worship is both personal (through prayers, supplication, dhikr, charity, pilgrimage, good deeds, good manners, kindness, compassion, truthfulness, taqwa, and so forth), as well as public (how we setup our state, the laws that are established, the economic system that is put into place, the cultural norms and limitations as well as outward moral behavior, how war is conducted, and so on and so forth).

    Of course, some people will always make mistakes and commit crimes and aggression in the name of God and the same will occur with regards to those who fight for or represent something other than God. The shaytan (devils) will always work to corrupt us and cause us to do evil and to divide us by nationality or race or tribe or language or wealth or whatever. This is all part of the test of this life – which is temporary. The goal is the Hereafter – which is eternal.

    and Allah knows best.

    Read More
  86. @Bliss

    As Muslims, we say: “We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator”!
     
    The act of worship that defines Islam is prostrating to the Kaaba 5 times a day. Here is the Kaaba:

    http://almiskeenah.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/changing-kiswa-1432c.jpg


    Is that the Creator? GTFO...

    Bliss – we pray five times a day to the Creator, not to the Kabbah. We pray in the direction of the Kabbah (called Qiblah) so that any Muslim no matter where he is in the world is praying in the same direction. The prayer is not to the Kabbah nor do we give the Kabbah any sort of divine properties or attributes.

    If you think about, what you are actually implying here can be applied to any house of worship within any religion in any part of the world. Are mosques, churches, and synagogues places of worship or objects of worship? After answering this (truthfully), apply the same to the direction of worship (like the Muslim Qiblah) as well as pilgrimage sites, graveyards, places where religious festivals are held, and so forth. Are we not to have mosques, churches, synagogues, and various religious symbols just because those outside of a faith may mistakenly believe that we are worshiping those symbols or those constructions (rather than God), even though there is no truth to this?

    Every Masjid (including Masjid al-Harem where the Kabbah is located) and every Muslim home is a house of worship. We do not worship the house…we worship the One who created those houses (as well as everything else in existence; everything in space and time).

    One of the most important verses of the Quran is Ayatul-Kursi…so listen to it and tell me how could one confuse the Creator of the Kabba with the Kabba (or any other earthly construction) after hearing, reciting, and understanding this…

    {God is He besides Whom there is no god, the Ever-living, the Self-subsisting by Whom all subsist; slumber does not overtake Him nor sleep; whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is His; who is he that can intercede with Him but by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them, and they cannot comprehend anything out of His knowledge except what He pleases, His knowledge extends over the heavens and the earth, and the preservation of them both tires Him not, and He is the Most High, the Great} Quran 2:255

    Other important Quranic verses in the context of this discussion…

    {He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. He has made you and the cattle in pairs and multiplied you by His creation. There is certainly nothing like Him. He is the all-Hearing and all-Aware} Quran 42:11

    {And from among God’s signs are the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. Do not bow down in worship to the sun or to the moon, but bow down to the God who created them, if it is truly Him you serve} (Quran 41:37

    Also, take note of this narration from Prophet Muhammad (saaws)…

    Abdulla bin Umar said: I saw the Prophet doing tawwaf around the Ka’aba saying “How sweet and good are you and how sweet is your scent. How great are you and how great is your sanctity. But by the One who has the soul of Mohammad is in His Hand (meaning – God), the sanctity of a believer is greater with God than your sanctity” (Ibn Maja)

    More complete response…

    Further information…

    http://www.answering-christianity.com/black_stone.htm

    Significance of the Kabbah…

    http://www.speakingtree.in/blog/the-kaabasignificance-and-what-is-in-it

    Miracles of the Kabbah (but remember that a miracle is not something that you worship…you only worship the Creator who is responsible for the miracle) by non-Muslims I believe…

    Some unknown facts about the Kabbah…

    http://muslimmatters.org/2012/11/15/ten-things-you-didnt-know-about-the-kaaba/

    And in particular, note that a sect of Ishmailies actually attacked the Kabbah and took the black stone from it which was broken and split into a number of few pieces (eventually returned to the Abassid Khalifah). More…

    If we thought Allah was in the Kabbah, then this act would have been the end of Islam. So let us be real and honest. Address the beliefs of other religions as those who adhere to those religions believe (and not what one has mistaken to assume based on rumors, gossip, conspiracy theories, or false accusations…all of which the Internet is a refuge for).

    Finally, we believe that the Kabbah will be destroyed eventually (as one of the signs of the end-times). You can search the “signs of qiyamah” in order to find ahadith reference. This and everything else I’ve stated above should suffice as proof that we do NOT worship the Kabbah in any way, shape, or form.

    Read More
  87. @Rurik
    Why do you hate white folks Bliss?

    Did a white girl snub you?

    The majority of whites do not subscribe to your views. Many whites hate your kind. Remember: the Confederacy and the Third Reich did not survive for long. They weren’t crushed by non-whites, were they?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    Many whites hate your kind.
     
    I know

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOyBO-ts20c
    , @Hibernian
    If you think any but a small portion of Union soldiers were motivated, at first, by hatred for the South, you're a fool. Later on, after some of their buddies were killed by the Rebs, then they began to hate. That's the way politicians arrange things. The soldiers go to war to prove their manhood and patriotism and, if a draft law is passed, to stay out of jail. Then the fighting begins and they learn to hate the enemy. Civilians also learn to hate the enemy because their sons, brothers, and fathers are killed. Peace negotiations become impossible and Unconditional Surrender is demanded. (Or something like Wilson's irrational, hypocritical "Fourteen Points.")

    I stand by the Just War theory of Thomas Aquinas.
  88. we pray five times a day to the Creator, not to the Kabbah.

    You are all prostrating five times a day not to the Creator who is omnipresent but towards a man-made object, regardless of where in the world you are located. That looks like the most extreme form of idol worship that ever existed.

    You call the Kaaba the House of Allah as if the Creator needs a house to protect him from the elements he himself created.

    If you think about, what you are actually implying here can be applied to any house of worship

    No it can’t. You obviously aren’t thinking for yourself. The Kaaba is not a house of worship, it is a house you worship….from outside.</i> You are not allowed to prostrate in any other direction. Big difference.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    You're making the same kind of arguments against Islam that extreme Protestants make against Catholicism. That kind of argument doesn't get any better with age.
    , @Sonic
    Bliss - I gave you a full and complete response but you ignored it and continued on with what you want to believe.

    Islam is the only true Monotheistic religion in the world...and this is on account of the Divine Attributes of Allah that are stated and explained in the Quran and Sunnah. Polytheism is not just in worshiping (other deities), but attribution and association (to the creation for something that is Unique to the Creator).

    Allah is the Creator, not the creation. Nothing in the creation is comparable to the Creator. If one gives the creation any of the attributes of the Creator...then they are no longer Muslim. The Kabbah was created, has been attacked multiple times, and will be destroyed as our religion teaches us. We Prostrate only to Allah. It is Allah who has sent us Prophets and Messengers to teach us how to pray, when to pray, what purifies and what negates our prayers, the direction we are to pray no matter where in the world we are, the rituals of communal worship, the rituals of pilgrimage, how to interpret and enact the laws of God, and so on and so forth. In a situation in which we do not know where the Qibliah is, we can pray in any direction (the prayer is not nullified).

    {The East and the West belong to God. Wherever you turn, you are always in the presence of God. God is All-Encompassing, All-Knowing} Quran 2:115

    this does not contradict this...

    {We have been seeing you turning your face to the heavens. So, We will certainly assign to you a Qiblah that you would like. Now, turn your face in the direction of the Sacred Mosque (Al-Masjid-ul-Haram), and (O Muslims), wherever you are, turn your faces in its direction. Even those who have been given the Book know well that it is the truth from their Lord, and Allah is not unaware of what they do} Quran 2:144

    Masjid al-Harem is a house of worship, NOT an object of worship. There is nothing in Masjid al-Harem that we consider Divine, nor is the Kabbah a representation of God. I provided all the proofs already. The one who doesn't want to believe will always look for an excuse.

    The Kabbah was cleansed of all idols (which the pagans had setup centuries after Abraham) and returned to the same state it was in when Prophet Abraham (as) and his sons (as) built it. If you are sincere in your interest to understand things truthfully regardless of your own beliefs, then I recommend reading some books (freely available online) on the the concept of "Tawheed".
  89. @5371
    I wandered in here by accident and have, as they say, no dog in this fight. Nevertheless I couldn't help but notice the ridiculousness of your comment.

    [As for Thomas Jefferson, he had a sexual affair and 4 children with his black slave Sally Hemings.]

    No, the evidence indicated only that someone of Jefferson's male line fathered children on Hemings. His nephews stayed frequently on his estate.

    [Well, he sure didn’t look like a WASP did he?]

    Assertion not argument.

    No, the evidence indicated only that someone of Jefferson’s male line fathered children on Hemings. His nephews stayed frequently on his estate.

    Of course you didn’t provide any evidence to support your assertion. Here is the evidence:

    http://www.monticello.org/site/plantation-and-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-brief-account

    Based on documentary, scientific, statistical, and oral history evidence, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation (TJF) Research Committee Report on Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings (January 2000) remains the most comprehensive analysis of this historical topic. Ten years later, TJF and most historians believe that, years after his wife’s death, Thomas Jefferson was the father of the six children of Sally Hemings mentioned in Jefferson’s records, including Beverly, Harriet, Madison, and Eston Hemings.

    The DNA testing found no genetic link between the Hemings and Carr descendants, refuting Jefferson’s grandchildren’s assertion that his Carr nephews fathered Sally Hemings’s children.

    Read More
  90. @Bliss
    The majority of whites do not subscribe to your views. Many whites hate your kind. Remember: the Confederacy and the Third Reich did not survive for long. They weren't crushed by non-whites, were they?

    Many whites hate your kind.

    I know

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Having looked this fellow up, he was never a professor at Harvard and is an ignorant idiot. However to do him justice, he is at least consistent in opposing Zionism as well, unlike so many of his co-ethnics.
  91. @Sonic
    There is a lot of hate here - in these comments directed at this article and at life in general.

    I understand the author's viewpoint, but I insist that he is missing something far more important than the issue of a flag. What exactly is it that allowed race-based slavery for financial gain in the first place? Why is racism so pervasive throughout American history, including even in the hearts of many from the North (like President Abraham Lincoln) who are credited with ending the institution of slavery?

    What happened to the Native Americans and then the Japanese and Vietnamese...is happening again right now with regards to the Muslims. Actually, we can say that American actions in the Muslim world are far worse than what has happened in other dark periods of American history. Yet, the left and the right, the conservatives and liberals, the republicans and democrats, the north and south...all continue on while only being worried about flags or their particular race or their lifestyle or wealth accumulation (and that sort of thing)!

    Power corrupts. Money is the root of all evil. And it is the American economy that keeps the monumental diversity of people together (and by diversity I am not only talking about ethnic groups but also ideologies and belief systems). In this, I find it quite ironic that the author of this article is using cultural marxism as a scapegoat. Don't support Marxism, but be fair and honest in your blame towards it, and stay away from conspiracy theories. Many of today's problems are the consequence of success, of conquering the world, of overseeing a global empire, and of creating a new, dominant culture whose values infringe upon the values of many many other communities and cultures (particularly those that are more traditional and more religious).

    The perceived victimization some White Americans feel (and in particular, those in the south who are proud of their culture and heritage) is truly misplaced and misguided. Non-white communities in the US are the ones suffering the most, all while bombs are dropped on poor third world countries composed mainly of non-whites! America's conflicts with Germany and Russia however should be brought up in fairness as well since these are cases where wealthy nations-states with a White, Christian majority have fought one another or opposed one another. Poor white communities in the US are suffering, certainly. It is unfortunate though that so many of them enlist in the armed forces in order to escape that poverty. When the rich wage war, the poor suffer the most.

    The author here should reassess what it really means to be a Christian, and whether southern culture was ever really a representation of that. Rather than using cultural marxism as a scapegoat...isn't secularism a far greater corruption of Christianity and a culture based on Christian values as compared to whether you have a free-market system or a state-run economy?

    It can be said that Russian society (though secular and still very liberal)...is more conservative now and closer to its Christian roots as compared to America. This despite the fact that the Russian system is far more socialist as compared to capitalist America.

    People want to have pride in their culture and where they are from...I get that. But too much pride is a dangerous thing (indeed, it is the primary attribute of satan which caused his downfall). The only advice I can convey is to remind each and every person that they will die alone, and that when they face our Creator after death, they will be held to account for their beliefs as well as their deeds. One's skin tone, country of origin, culture, heritage, lineage, and so forth - will be of no benefit at that point in time.

    Prophet Muhammad (saaws) said (in the Farewell Sermon): “All mankind is from Adam and Eve. An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor does a non-Arab have any superiority over an Arab; A White has no superiority over a Black nor does a Black have any superiority over a White…except in piety and good deeds”

    “The perceived victimization some White Americans feel (and in particular, those in the south who are proud of their culture and heritage) is truly misplaced and misguided.”

    When you’re poor and white, you’re out of sight.

    Read More
  92. @Cleophus
    I'm afraid you're simply wrong in your basic premise that the Confederate Battle
    Flag was raised "as a massive symbol of resistance to the civil rights movement." It was raised, not as a symbol of "racism" or "oppression," but in commemoration of the centennial of he War Between the States. If you don't believe me, go back and read the resolutions that officially put them in place. From Alabama to Georgia and every Southern State in between that chose to honor the Confederacy with this symbol, it was done as a commemoration of their State's role in the Confederacy, and nothing else. Now the Southern People, however, the people whom you seem to want to portray as pellagra ridden, dirt floor cabin dwellers who were too ignorant to understand anything but the most base forms of hatred for their fellow man; well, I guess you'll just have to mark that up to the trashy family that it was your sorry luck to be born into, because the South I grew up in didn't wasn't anything like that. I was born in 1947, one of the first "baby boomers" in Lauderdale County, Alabama. I grew up in a Christian family of 3 boys and 5 girls, and it may astound you to find out that we had wood floors and electricity and a big Zenith black dial table top radio. This radio was our window to the world, which my Momma and Daddy would use to listen to the local news and the events of the world. It may also astound you that, almost every weekend, the black family from down the road, (our closest neighbors), would come and listen to the "Grand Ole' Opry" and "News Around The Globe" with us. It may also deflate your hatred to know that this very same black family worked right beside us in the cotton fields, picking cotton. You see, both of our families were sharecroppers working the same man's land, and from what I could tell, when it come time to weigh our crops, both Mr. Edwards, the father of the black family, and my Daddy got paid the same amount for the same weight of cotton. Though Mr. Edwards 3 girls did raise a truck patch for themselves to make extra money. They went to a different church than we did, but it wasn't because they were black, it was because they were Baptist and we were Church of Christ. If they had wanted to attend our church, I know they would have been more than welcome. You are trying to paint the entire Southland with the dirty paint from your tainted families pot and that's just not right. I didn't grow up the way you described, hating black people and talking about lynchings. I grew up with my head bobbing up and down in the cotton fields under the hot autumn sun right beside my black neighbors.
    Were there differences? Yes, of course their were. We knew there was a line socially and culturally not to be crossed, but it was a line drawn by both sides, both black and white, and it was a boundary easily and freely kept. It didn't interfere with our families helping each other, or going fishing or swimming together. It's just the way things were at the time.
    You say that your "uneducated relatives didn't know the history," regarding the Confederacy and the Confederate flag. I find that VERY hard to believe. From the time I was old enough to walk, I was told stories about our Confederate heroes like Patrick Cleburne and Stonewall Jackson, as well as the exploits of my own family members who served, (my Great Granddaddy served in the 16th Alabama infantry, Company C), and fought all over the South during the war, and I was, and am, extremely proud of that fact. The point I'm making is that, any boy raised up from after the war to at least the 1980's knew by heart the great battles and the heroic Southern men who fought in them. It was just part of being a boy in the South. If your family didn't know it's history, and spent it's time hating blacks and revering lynchings, don't try to make that sickness out to be a representation of the whole South. That's your cross to bear, not the South's.
    When the civil rights struggle started, the Southern people who you try to portray as backward and inherently "racist" were in reality neither one. The Southern people realized that the federal government had far overstepped it's bounds in interfering with the way the Sovereign States handled their social and cultural matters. The people of the State of Alabama, both black and white, had voted and decreed that "separate but equal" was going to be law of the land. The federal government had no Constitutional right to interfere in that decision. When the president illegally decided to send federal troops into the South to defy Alabama law, the people, knowing their history, and knowing that this was a profound and egregious encroachment upon the rights of the States, began to fly the Battle Flag as a symbol of defiance and resistance to the tyranny of the federal government. It was never used as a symbol of so called "racism."
    Who is to blame for using the Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of "racism?" Does it really matter? Every person is going to make of the flag what he will, no power on earth can change that. For me, the Confederate Battle Flag will always stand as a proud symbol of the defense of home and family against overwhelming odds, and of heroism in battle, and honor, and duty, and, most especially the everlasting defiance of tyranny. What everyone else makes out of it, well, that's up to them. They can follow the truth of history, or they can follow a narrative of lies. In the end, it still comes down to what each individual thinks.

    I agree with a lot of what you said, but this,

    “The people of the State of Alabama, both black and white, had voted and decreed that “separate but equal” was going to be law of the land.”

    doesn’t make sense historically.

    Read More
  93. @Bliss
    The majority of whites do not subscribe to your views. Many whites hate your kind. Remember: the Confederacy and the Third Reich did not survive for long. They weren't crushed by non-whites, were they?

    If you think any but a small portion of Union soldiers were motivated, at first, by hatred for the South, you’re a fool. Later on, after some of their buddies were killed by the Rebs, then they began to hate. That’s the way politicians arrange things. The soldiers go to war to prove their manhood and patriotism and, if a draft law is passed, to stay out of jail. Then the fighting begins and they learn to hate the enemy. Civilians also learn to hate the enemy because their sons, brothers, and fathers are killed. Peace negotiations become impossible and Unconditional Surrender is demanded. (Or something like Wilson’s irrational, hypocritical “Fourteen Points.”)

    I stand by the Just War theory of Thomas Aquinas.

    Read More
  94. @Bliss

    we pray five times a day to the Creator, not to the Kabbah.
     
    You are all prostrating five times a day not to the Creator who is omnipresent but towards a man-made object, regardless of where in the world you are located. That looks like the most extreme form of idol worship that ever existed.

    You call the Kaaba the House of Allah as if the Creator needs a house to protect him from the elements he himself created.


    If you think about, what you are actually implying here can be applied to any house of worship
     
    No it can't. You obviously aren't thinking for yourself. The Kaaba is not a house of worship, it is a house you worship....from outside.</i> You are not allowed to prostrate in any other direction. Big difference.

    You’re making the same kind of arguments against Islam that extreme Protestants make against Catholicism. That kind of argument doesn’t get any better with age.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Hello Hibernian! Thanks for the comment.

    The difference is that the Protestants still believe that God is divided into three - and that Jesus (as) has Divine properties and Divine attributes. Some say Jesus (as) is the literal son of God while others say Jesus is God incarnate. There are many differing viewpoints and explanations of the Trinity just within the Protestant branch (say nothing of the other main branches). But we believe that this is a clear form of polytheism, and that the concept of trinity is a common belief and understanding between the main Christian branches - Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox Christianity, as well as most sub-branches.

    Everything goes back to its root...which is the issue here and not the rituals that come afterwords. The Protestants of course take issue with additional iconography and idolatry below the basic belief in Trinity with regards to Catholicism. Returning the one of the original issues you responded to Bliss in regards to...

    If Christians were required to pray in a Church or they all had to face a certain direction (lets say towards Vatican City just as an example) whenever they prayed...then this would not be something that falls into the category of a ritual. It would not be an issue of worship since it is already understood and established that the Trinity is the central belief system for the vast majority of Christians. No one would confuse the Trinity with Vatican City (in such a scenario).

    On the other hand, the example of a person sitting in a confessional booth discussing religious matters or sharing their sinful deeds with a priest might just be a ritual, or it might be a type of polytheism. It does not become a form of idolatry or polytheism unless the worshiper actually believes that the priest has the powers or attributes of God, such as saying that the priest can forgive the other person's sins on behalf of or in place of God! In such a case, we would dispute this and call it polytheistic because the priest has clearly attributed to himself the Divine and Unique attributes of God. The solution to polytheism of any kind, is an understanding of "Tawheed". Of knowing the attributes of God and recognizing God in His essence and attributes as the Most Unique and Transcendent. By definition then, no object of worship can be like, equal to, a partner with, or in similitude with God. God is high above and transcendent over the creation.

    Only God can forgive our sins (not men, Prophets, or a Messiah). So one needs to pray directly to God in order to have their sins forgiven and not to any sort of intermediary between them and God. Our line to God is a direct line (so to speak). Thus, do not dial the operator or get carried away with other callers (like statues, celestial bodies, mother nature, the scientific method, etc.).

    The unification of God (as Christians and others believe) is not that same as the uniqueness of God. One can say that God is unified through a trinity or any other group of Divine beings, representations, idols, statues, incarnations, etc. But we believe that Allah is the *most* unique! So nothing can be like, or a representation of, or a son or daughter to, or an incarnation of God. Not our Scriptures, not our Prophets, not our rituals, not our prayer rugs, not our Mosques, not the Kabbah...nor any other religious symbol.

    The Creator is separate from the creation. The Creator is however, not a silent Creator (for that would be an attribute that contradicts with the attributes of Divine Love, Mercy, Justice, Law-Giver, etc.). The Creator has given us a message informing us of the reason for our creation, the purpose of our life, the laws to abide by, and stories and warnings to help us understand why things are the way they are and what is to come. Our Creator has sent Messengers and Prophets to convey God's message and teach mankind how to abide by those rules and regulations.

    Lastly, the previous Scriptures are a part of our religion too. The root is the same...

    Allah = Yewah = Jehovah

    We worship the Father that the Christians mention, but without a Son or Holy Spirit (rather, we say that Jesus a.s. was a Messenger and Prophet of God). Jesus (as) himself worshiped the Father (so do you really think he was worshiping himself)? We do not disbelieve in the Torah and Gospels or what came before that, but believe the Quran is the final and uncorrupted Message for all of mankind (and not just the Israelites or this or that nation), while the previous scriptures were eventually corrupted. One of the ways the Quran remains in tact is that, as a book of Arabic poetry, it is has been memorized by generations and generations - a process that has continued and thus, has increased every year and every century since the death of Prophet Muhammad (saaws).

    Also, recently, the oldest Quranic manuscript was discovered...

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-33436021

    and Allah knows best
  95. @Cleophus
    I'm afraid you're simply wrong in your basic premise that the Confederate Battle
    Flag was raised "as a massive symbol of resistance to the civil rights movement." It was raised, not as a symbol of "racism" or "oppression," but in commemoration of the centennial of he War Between the States. If you don't believe me, go back and read the resolutions that officially put them in place. From Alabama to Georgia and every Southern State in between that chose to honor the Confederacy with this symbol, it was done as a commemoration of their State's role in the Confederacy, and nothing else. Now the Southern People, however, the people whom you seem to want to portray as pellagra ridden, dirt floor cabin dwellers who were too ignorant to understand anything but the most base forms of hatred for their fellow man; well, I guess you'll just have to mark that up to the trashy family that it was your sorry luck to be born into, because the South I grew up in didn't wasn't anything like that. I was born in 1947, one of the first "baby boomers" in Lauderdale County, Alabama. I grew up in a Christian family of 3 boys and 5 girls, and it may astound you to find out that we had wood floors and electricity and a big Zenith black dial table top radio. This radio was our window to the world, which my Momma and Daddy would use to listen to the local news and the events of the world. It may also astound you that, almost every weekend, the black family from down the road, (our closest neighbors), would come and listen to the "Grand Ole' Opry" and "News Around The Globe" with us. It may also deflate your hatred to know that this very same black family worked right beside us in the cotton fields, picking cotton. You see, both of our families were sharecroppers working the same man's land, and from what I could tell, when it come time to weigh our crops, both Mr. Edwards, the father of the black family, and my Daddy got paid the same amount for the same weight of cotton. Though Mr. Edwards 3 girls did raise a truck patch for themselves to make extra money. They went to a different church than we did, but it wasn't because they were black, it was because they were Baptist and we were Church of Christ. If they had wanted to attend our church, I know they would have been more than welcome. You are trying to paint the entire Southland with the dirty paint from your tainted families pot and that's just not right. I didn't grow up the way you described, hating black people and talking about lynchings. I grew up with my head bobbing up and down in the cotton fields under the hot autumn sun right beside my black neighbors.
    Were there differences? Yes, of course their were. We knew there was a line socially and culturally not to be crossed, but it was a line drawn by both sides, both black and white, and it was a boundary easily and freely kept. It didn't interfere with our families helping each other, or going fishing or swimming together. It's just the way things were at the time.
    You say that your "uneducated relatives didn't know the history," regarding the Confederacy and the Confederate flag. I find that VERY hard to believe. From the time I was old enough to walk, I was told stories about our Confederate heroes like Patrick Cleburne and Stonewall Jackson, as well as the exploits of my own family members who served, (my Great Granddaddy served in the 16th Alabama infantry, Company C), and fought all over the South during the war, and I was, and am, extremely proud of that fact. The point I'm making is that, any boy raised up from after the war to at least the 1980's knew by heart the great battles and the heroic Southern men who fought in them. It was just part of being a boy in the South. If your family didn't know it's history, and spent it's time hating blacks and revering lynchings, don't try to make that sickness out to be a representation of the whole South. That's your cross to bear, not the South's.
    When the civil rights struggle started, the Southern people who you try to portray as backward and inherently "racist" were in reality neither one. The Southern people realized that the federal government had far overstepped it's bounds in interfering with the way the Sovereign States handled their social and cultural matters. The people of the State of Alabama, both black and white, had voted and decreed that "separate but equal" was going to be law of the land. The federal government had no Constitutional right to interfere in that decision. When the president illegally decided to send federal troops into the South to defy Alabama law, the people, knowing their history, and knowing that this was a profound and egregious encroachment upon the rights of the States, began to fly the Battle Flag as a symbol of defiance and resistance to the tyranny of the federal government. It was never used as a symbol of so called "racism."
    Who is to blame for using the Confederate Battle Flag as a symbol of "racism?" Does it really matter? Every person is going to make of the flag what he will, no power on earth can change that. For me, the Confederate Battle Flag will always stand as a proud symbol of the defense of home and family against overwhelming odds, and of heroism in battle, and honor, and duty, and, most especially the everlasting defiance of tyranny. What everyone else makes out of it, well, that's up to them. They can follow the truth of history, or they can follow a narrative of lies. In the end, it still comes down to what each individual thinks.

    I am less than 3 years younger than you and I don’t agree with some of what you have to say.

    We never had separate but equal; we had separate but unequal. Separate but equal has never been tried.

    If you can’t remember that then you are not trying very hard.

    For example, take the Montgomery bus boycott. It wasn’t just the fact that whites and blacks had different sections in which to sit, it also was the fact that blacks had to give up their seats when the white section filled up.

    Read More
  96. @Rurik
    OK, here we go.. ; )

    When you fall down as hard as Russia did, the only way to go is up.
     
    You're not giving Putin any credit. What he managed was a miracle. Russia was slated for eternal depravation and her resources looted for perpetuity by the International Oligarchs as the Russian people slipped away into the dust bin of obscurity and privation that they suffered under for so damn long.

    The people of Chechnya, Dagestan, and all the surrounding areas want full and complete independence from Russia. Russia needs to stay out of these regions (they can secure their borders) just as the US needs to stay out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and other Muslim countries.
     
    it is dishonest to pretend that Russia's relationship with Chechnya is equal to the wars of aggression the US has waged on Iraq and others. Iraq is thousands of miles away from the US, whereas Chechnya is on Russia's doorstep.

    Who is Ramzan Kadyrov? Isn't he Putin's good friend? Doesn't he have like a thousand wives or something? Half of them teenagers?

    It would be better if we could cover a little less ground with these posts, then we might be able to flesh this stuff out a little better.


    Your justification for Putin’s actions in Syria is no different than those who justify American actions in Saudi Arabia or the other GCC nations. Both the US and Russia are supporting criminal tyrants (whether the House of Saud or Bashar al-Assad).
     
    OMG you're one of those?!

    You too want to see Syria utterly destroyed by head slicers and cannibals funded by the Zionists and Sunnis because Assad is of the wrong tribe and tolerates Christians (infidels) in Syria?

    I have to admit it's fascinating to hear at least someone try to make that case. I couldn't believe that shit-bag Morsi as soon as he comes to power wants to align with the Zionists and destroy yet another Muslim country. What is it with you guys? You hate your brothers so much you're all willing to toss the Palestinians under the Zionist boot so you can slice some of your fellow Muslim's head's off. I really don't get it. Please help us all to understand this madness.

    , yet support dictators like those in Syria or Egypt
     
    From what I know about Assad is that like Gadaffi, he has kept the peace and tolerates Christians and others. I know when a vote was recently held that the people of Syria overwhelmingly voted to keep Assad in office. I also know many of the men trying to kill Assad are what I consider sub-human beasts. To whit :

    http://www.redstate.com/uploads/2014/09/syria-execution.jpg

    those men have been tortured

    it sickens me to think my tax dollars are going to human garbage like that

    And no, the US and NATO did not want to help the Libyan people. Please. They wanted to destroy Libya (and Gadhafi's gold Dinar) just like they wanted to destroy Iraq and every other country that could be seen as a potential obstacle to Greater Israel.

    I do not believe that 9/11 was an inside job.
     
    http://www.altacocker.com/other_items/thermite/thermite_wtc-core-beam-cut.jpg

    we can discuss that elsewhere


    As far as Crimea and Ukraine go, it would be better for the people of these nations if BOTH Russia and the US/NATO stayed out of their affairs.
     
    sometime you seem to have no clue whatsoever. Russia was forced to respond to what the US and NATO were doing. They would be thrilled if the US would just stop fomenting wars. Putin and Russia only want trade and prosperity. These conflicts are being imposed on them. Are you too blinded by your tribal and religious resentments to see the obvious?

    However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza.
     
    What are you talking about? Russia is against the conflict in Syria. You have things ass-backwards my friend.

    As for the Taliban and other intrigues and conflicts in the region vis a vis Russia, Putin and Islam, I really don't know enough about it all.

    With regards to Western Civilization, again immigration across the board (not just European) is what has led to today’s power and hegemony. It must be said that over the last few decades the West has become richer and more powerful than at any time in its history! This is after (not before) massive immigration from people all around the world. We can never discount the land stolen from the Native Americans; or the natural resources stolen from the Muslim world; or the role played by black slave labor in building the US (the most successful country in all of western civilization); or the role played today by illegal immigrants from Mexico in providing cheap labor; or the role played today by child labor in countries like China and Vietnam and so forth on behalf of western corporations; or all the foreigners (some of whom don’t even speak english) working in various university labs at the research level
     
    You know what this sounds like? The same pathetic tripe I hear all day long. 'Whitey is evil and all his accomplishments are from non-white people who he's exploited and he needs massive non-white immigration, blah, blah, *hurl* blah.

    Fuck all that.

    Like I said, I don't know too much about the details on the ground over there in Russia vs. the Muslims. But what I can tell you, is that if the Muslim's problem with Putin is that he doesn't allow enough non-Russian immigration into Russia, then I stand 100% with Putin, and would tell all non-Russians to fuck the hell off. Russia, like Europe and the rest of the white countries have just as much right to maintain their ethnicity and culture and self-determination as anyone else. And anyone who thinks otherwise can suck an egg. Dry.


    for what western society truly stands for.
     
    At one time it stood for honor and truth and freedom for the people of Western society. Today it has been perverted and subverted to mean sodomy and pedastery and corruption of the human spirit.

    The very wars and conflicts that the western world has inflicted upon others, has led to the undoing of its cherished freedoms.
     
    The recent wars you're talking about are also inflicted upon the (now completely corrupted) western world. When the West was the West, we would have hanged by the neck every single politician who had betrayed their sacred oath to the Constitution and the people of the US. But today the west (especially in the US and England and France) are a rotted out corpse of what we once were. If we still had the spirit of the true West, that honored things like truth, we wouldn't be waging wars based on lies. It wasn't the wars that lead to our undoing, those were a consequence of having our spirit murdered by alien banksters who had taken the reins of our civilization and plunged us on the rocks of destruction.

    yet it is this very belief (that serves as one of the foundations for western civilization) which gives those groups and others such opportunity to take control.
     
    it wasn't our belief in freedom that allowed these "other groups' to take control. It was our suicidally insane immigration policy that allowed them to enter our societies and undermine them for their own tribal ends. The same kind of immigration madness you seem to be advocating.

    We are not even allowed to have sex before marriage, so how can rape be a part of our religion?
     
    um.. think about that for a second.

    and it doesn't matter whether or not your religion permits rape, it's enough that Muslims are raping school girls and young women at epidemic proportions in non-Muslim countries. Often gang rapes and there's a whole sub-culture of Muslims that prey on these young girls and women.

    In times of war, there may be certain exceptions regarding marriage…but even in this case it is done in a way superior to what any other nation or culture would do.
     
    is this an attempt to try to justify rape? I guess because you're in a perpetual state of war with the infidels that is permissible to rape their women. Since it is an act of war? WTF?

    A man cannot have sexual relations with a woman unless he is willing to take care of her and be responsible for her (which is marriage in all cases except prisoners of war). That is the exact opposite of rape,
     
    what about the prisoners of war? They're OK to rape? It's not "rape"?

    There is a right way and a wrong way to approach war, deal with prisoners of war, and conquer others.
     
    a right way to "conquer others"? really?!


    Trust in the One who created you to inform you on the right way to do these things (and everything else). Don’t trust yourselves or your own reason and intellect…
     
    You're for real, aren't you?

    As you said in the beginning…it is human nature to dominate. As Muslims, we say: “We have come to take you from the worship of creation to the worship of the Creator”!
     
    *whooo*

    Islam is based on unconditional faith. The truth is relative in the western way of thinking, while God is the absolute truth upon which all other truths are based on in Islam.
     
    OK

    No interest or usury (which is how those very bankers and the institutions they serve gain so much power to begin with
     
    I agree with you there!

    And I'm sure there are very many beautiful and sublime tenants and truths in Islam. I respect all religions that are peaceful and humane. In so far as Islam is peaceful and respectful of other people's right to their religious beliefs, then I say salam alaikum to them.

    However, as soon as they get some inkling that it's their job to spread their Islamic "truths" by the sword (or immigration) into non-Islamic lands, (like they did at one time to Andalusia or more recently to Kosovo), then all my good will goes right out the window. And I become the flaming sword of the Western man's Western blood and the vengeance of his fallen heroes and Saints. And all shall feel his terrible wrath.

    Other than that.. ; )

    It was fun my friend.

    There is much we can learn about each other's cultures and 'truths'.

    God bless

    Rurik – thank you for continuing our discussion, even though it sometimes gets very off-topic. However, the essence of this discussion still relates back to the confederate flag, southern culture and heritage, racism, and the topics that lie at the essence of the original commentary.

    Russian and American imperialism are very similar, even if one is worse than the other. Since both the US and Russia claim to be fighting a “war on terror” and in both cases, had occupation forces stationed in those countries, there is a similarity (between Iraq and Chechnya). Certainly, the destruction of Iraq exceeds that of what has been done in Chechnya since the primary aggressor there is Russia while in Iraq, the US has had a great many allies (the whole of the UN for a time in fact…including even Russia). As for Putin’s accomplishments, maybe he deserves some credit domestically. But beyond that, the best that can be said is that Putin is simply not over-reacting to the mistakes that the American Empire and NATO are making. This comes from the experience of Russia’s own failed empire more than anything else (just ask the Afghans). Oil plays a big role in Russia’s economy and its ability to stand back up after prior collapse. And there are many countries (including some in Europe) that can take care of their own people while not oppressing other nations or acting as an imperial power and playing the dirty game of global power. I think you should look to those nations as a better example of western civilization (you even mentioned some) instead of Russia.

    …You too want to see Syria utterly destroyed by head slicers and cannibals funded by the Zionists and Sunnis because Assad is of the wrong tribe and tolerates Christians (infidels) in Syria?…

    I would not even call the Zionists cannibals. This level of hatred and dehumanization only results from conspiracy theories and detachment from reality. I’m not saying that the anti-Assad rebels are angels by any means. But let us be fair in our criticisms. Otherwise, we cannot have an honest discussion of any kind. Head slicers are better than the mass-torture and barrel bombs that Assad’s regime is known for. Read the reports of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights as one example. And for your information, Assad’s intelligence has always cooperated with western intelligence when it comes to Islamist fighters. Assad is from a minority religion (not just a tribe or ethnic group) who empowers other minority groups by oppressing the majority. Christians who pay jizyah (which isn’t that much) have nothing to fear from an authentic Islamic State. It is wrong to say that a Sunni Muslim Emirate or Khalifah would get rid of or mass-murder all Christians. ISIS has many deviations with regards to Islamic Law and this is because they declared themselves as a Caliphate without the correct Islamic procedures – and if the foundation of something is incorrect, everything else will eventually fall into error. Assad has not had any success in stopping Zionism by the way. So let us see what happens when he is removed. Then, if another Saudi Arabia or another Turkey is created…I won’t argue with you that the Zionists did indeed fund the whole the anti-Assad resistance. But as of now, I maintain that it is a genuine Islamic Awakening and a general popular revolution against a Russian-supported dictator for which others around the world are trying to influence and hijack but do not control (take what recently happened with Division 30 as an example).

    [MORE]

    With regards to Palestine…it is not an easy question. And don’t say that I want to cut off the heads of other Muslims as I do not support ISIS. One interesting thing that happened shortly after the declaration of the ISIS Khalifah was that Israel again attacked Gaza in brutal fashion. This self-declared Khalifah in Iraq was unable to assist them at all. Right now, guerilla warfare is the only way to resist stronger powers (whether the US in Iraq/Afghanistan, Russia in Chechnya, or Alawite-occupied Syria). It makes no sense to establish a state in such circumstances. Now tell me, particularly after the failure of the secular arab regimes in the 1967 war against Israel…is there any way to resist Israeli occupation aside from guerilla warfare (at the moment)? Since we both agree with regards to the extent of Zionist control of the US and other western countries…how do you propose to save the western world from this sort of ethnic/religious supremacist ideology? I don’t think raising or defending the confederate flag is going to do it (just to bring back some of the original topic/article into this discussion :).

    I agree that the US wants to destroy any nation that is an obstacle to Greater Israel, but the way in which this is done differs depending on who is in power. Democrats and liberals have a different way to approach the issue and protect Israel as compared to Republicans and conservatives. The same is true with regards to the different political parties within Israel (such as the Likud party vs. the Labor party). Remember Yitzhak Rabin and the price he paid for recognizing a Palestinian state. Obama has many of the same policies as Bush, but he also differs in approach and methodology though with the same hegemonic end-goal. During the Arab spring protests, we saw the corporate mainstream media try to paint those protests as protests for liberal democracy (which they certainly were not).

    For the sake of their own regional or special interests, the US would certainly the people of Libya and elsewhere to accept such a system while voting for leaders that are pro-west. But this is a fantasy and that is why such wishful thinking never came to pass. Even if you are right about Libya (remember, after Saddam’s defeat in Gulf War 2, Ghaddafi gave up his nuclear ambitions and his intelligence agency began cooperation with western intelligence agencies against the Islamist movement) that does not contradict with what I said. Even if the US wanted to get rid of Ghaddafi, that does not mean they are on the same side as the Muslims who want to get rid of Ghaddafi (for their own reasons). The world revolves around many different interests. And so, the competition that began a few years back is for influence and control over who comes to power in Libya, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere. Will it be those who support the west and thus, zionist control of the middle east? Or will it be the Muslims who look to re-establish the Khalifah ar-Rasheed that is capable of liberating Palestine and uniting the Muslims (and will certainly protect minorities and non-Muslim groups if those groups accept the authority of the Khalifah and are thus, subdued).

    Now, the US is bombing many of those very same rebels that you may (and many online conspiracy theorists) claim are funded by the Zionists. Does that make sense? Lastly, what is your take on the nuclear deal between the US and Iran (one that Obama defends, but republicans, conservatives, neo-conservatives, aipac, and supports of the likud party oppose)?

    “…However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza…”

    This comment of mine from before is in relation to the bombs that Assad has and the bombs he drops on his own people…bombs that are made in Russia, sent to Iran, and then sent to Syria (or even given directly)…

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/17/us-syria-russia-arms-idUSBREA0G0MN20140117

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-04-02/putin-defies-obama-in-syria-as-arms-fuel-assad-resurgence

    I never said any race is evil. All the white Muslims in the US, Europe, Russia, Turkey, Bosnia, and the various countries in the Caucasian Mountain Region – are all my brothers. I don’t see things from any racial or ethnic perspective. America (the modern-day equivalent of the Roman Empire) is a very diverse nation with many strengths and many great accomplishments. But also many crimes and transgressions, racism, and xenophobia. Ultimately, everything happens by the will of God, and all or our accomplishments could not exist without the permission of the Creator…for everything in the creation belongs to the Creator and not to us. The race-based outlook and perspective that you have is in my opinion, the real problem here. It taints your outlook and interpretation of events as they happen, or the comments of others, or the advice others may give. It is the elephant in the room whenever articles like the one Boyd has written here are brought up. My opinion is that Islam is the solution to this. And that solution applies to everyone – from Russia to Iraq and Syria to the Sudan to China.

    “…if the Muslim’s problem with Putin is that he doesn’t allow enough non-Russian immigration into Russia, then I stand 100% with Putin…”

    No. I’ve already explained the problem though. A point of research might be various youtube documentaries on the Chechen war.

    “…and it doesn’t matter whether or not your religion permits rape, it’s enough that Muslims are raping school girls and young women at epidemic proportions in non-Muslim countries. Often gang rapes and there’s a whole sub-culture of Muslims that prey on these young girls and women…”

    No. Rape (outside of war) is an attribute of those who permit sex outside of marriage. Most rapes that occur in the west generally, and the US in particular, are not committed by Muslims (yet, how come no one ever mentions the religion of those who do commit those rapes)! If a misguided Muslim who is acting in contradiction to his own religion commits a crime like rape…then when it is broadcast, his religion is mentioned. As for everyone else, it is just their name or sometimes their race (but not their religion). This is the injustice of western news reporting or the various anti-Muslim organizations that make money off of fear-mongering and Islamophobia (which also then serves as a foundation to justify the western wars of aggression that are taking place in the Muslim world today).

    Honor is found in getting married early and not committing sexual relations of any kind before marriage. Even then, a person of principle will not commit rape. Rape is one of the most exaggerated crimes in existence…particularly since the feminist movement takes advantage of this misinformation and turns the he-said she-said nature of such accusations into a political issue and agenda! Again, religious-based morals, strong family values, a society where as many of the people are provided for (rather than cut-throat capitalism), and where people are able to get married early and have respect for the institution of marriage…is what will truly nullify this real or imagined rape epidemic. And this is something all traditional, conservative movements as well as all the major religions of the world understand. Unfortunately, an attribute of western civilization is to replace reason with faith, to force religion to become private rather than public and communal, to support fanatical individualism and to protect free speech and the arts even when such things incite the worst impulses (sexual or otherwise) from within us. The result is free-mixing, dating, alcohol, intoxication, and so forth. This is the world that has come about post-enlightenment (not one that the Zionists created – though they certainly have taken advantage of it). From the Arab pagans to the culture of Ancient Rome, Ancient Persia, Ancient Greece, and from the lands of the Sodom/Gomora to the Island of Lesbos…this has all happened before. But…

    Prophet Muhammad (saaws) said: “There will always be a group among this Ummah (nation of believers), firm upon the truth, unharmed in their faith by those that oppose them”

    “…what about the prisoners of war? They’re OK to rape? It’s not “rape”…”

    In Islamic law, the only instance where it is permissible to have sex with someone other than your wife is when you take them as slaves when waging offensive (not defensive) war. I don’t consider this rape because such women are given food, shelter, and clothing (as are their children if they have any). This is only after you have given those whom you are fighting a chance to sign a peace treaty, disarm, and pay the jizya tax. And that only comes into play after you have gained complete authority over a land with a legitimate Khaliah (being able to defend your airspace is an important requisite for establishing authority). Non-Muslims are protected and can even administer their own laws (an option not even allowed in western states). But if a group of non-Muslims refuses to accept the authority of the Khaliah (which is formally done through paying jizyah) and insists on fighting it (as the only other option would be exile to a far off land)…then total war is waged on them. All their fighting men are killed. The elderly, women, and children are taken as slaves. This is only time instance where slavery is allowed in Islam (and even then, there is a way and procedure to end slavery…but so long as there is war and conflict, there will be slavery of one type or another). Rape is not allowed here because the women are provided for just like one would provide for his own wife. Have you ever seen a similar option for female prisoners of war or the widows of a nation those men have been killed off by others? Rather, rape is used by every other nation or culture during times of war as a weapon of war and it usually ends in killing the woman or she is left to a life of homelessness, poverty, handouts, refugee status, etc.

    This is the solution given to man by the Creator with regards to the specific problem of female prisoners of war and widows when you have gained authority and power in the land and are conquering others (more on the issue of conquering below). Again, this is not any type of war, but specific to wars of conquest to make the word of God the highest authority in the land. Either Monotheism is the highest authority, or polytheism is (as is the case today with America’s Empire, a resurgent Russia, and the system of International Law overseen by the United Nations). By contrast, the wives of those whom the US conquers or kills – are left as widows or placed in various prison camps (and we all know what goes on there). But you don’t here too much about it because anyone who is labelled as a “terrorist” is no longer considered a human being (in the western world today), and he is dehumanized to the point where you know nothing about his wife or kids or whatever. But, the Muslims are able to (or should be) take care of their women and the families of their martyrs and prisoners because their enemies (like the US are Russia) prefer to just drop bombs or conduct secret raids (which help populate various prison camps and black sites). No news coverage is given to all of these women and children who are harmed by this, and the US and its allies prefer their victims to remain hidden and unknown. In addition, since this is called a “war on terror”, there are no negotiations with “terrorists”. So how can there be the option of a peace treaty? Rather than conquering directly, what western nations are doing is giving support, funds, and arms to police states who conquer the indigenous people for them. Again, prison, rape, and torture becomes the way that these dictatorships maintain power. So compared to that, the Islamic way of war and conquest is truly humane and just. There is no “war on terror” or other silly acronyms in Islamic law. And we do not conquer or take slaves when fighting in defense of our lands and religion (which is clearly the case today).

    When Muslims conquer others (and all this that I’m talking about is theoretical again since such actions are conditional as I’ll explain further below), they are taking slaves only from those who are die-hard in their opposition to Islam and the authority of the Khalifah. They will never stop fighting against Islam – for otherwise they would have fled, signed a peace treaty, or payed jizya. If the US or Russia were to encounter an entire nation like this, they would like simply bomb everyone in it (like what happened in Nagasaki and Hiroshima even though in this case, the Japanese were ready to surrender). The slaves of a conquered nation will see that their leaders and fighting men lied to them, and that Islam is innocent of the many lies that were told to justify such an extreme position of fighting the Khalifah even when it has overpowered all other forms of authority in a specific region.

    Also, Islam encourages us to free all slaves eventually, but one cannot just assimilate a group that was in continuous war and unwilling to accept any sort of peace treaty nor pay a small tax for the protection of the Mujahideen. Again, this is all specific to circumstances that do not exist right now. But if a non-Muslim nation or group agrees to pays the jizyah…it becomes an obligation on the Mujahideen to protect them and fight against any who attacks them (even if they are a people who are drowning in sins and polytheism). So before you think of any accusation here, remember this; remember that an Islamic Khalifah is willing to fight on behalf of non-Muslim groups and minorities and their women and children regardless of how unjust we believe their culture and objects of worship are. Non-Muslim minorities in an Islamic State are a free and protected group…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb7xKC1Ttoo

    “…a right way to “conquer others”? really?!…”

    Yes, because the reality is that one is either conquered or does the conquering. The various countries of the Muslim world and larger third world today exist as they do because Europe successfully conquered them over the last few centuries. The US and Russia continued upon that path. Didn’t you say earlier that it is mankind’s nature to dominate? Ultimately, someone is in charge. Yes, there can be peace treaties and thereafter, mutual trade and so forth. But any reasonably sized global power exists because it has conquered others. The US today would not exist with having conquered the Native Americans, Spanish forces and Mexicans, and the British who were deemed occupiers. And this is true of ANY empire, regional power, global power, or civilization. I’m not talking about individual nations, so don’t confuse the two.

    Now realistically, we are not going to have any one power that rules every inch of the globe – at least not yet. Technologically, the foundation for such a future one-world government and currency is being put into place – but that doesn’t mean it will ever get off the ground. Realistically, we as Muslims know that the Islamic Khailfah will not conquer the entire world…at least until the return of Jesus a.s. and the defeat of the anti-Christ as well as Yajuj and Majuj. Thus, power today as was the case yesterday is decentralized (and as a whole, that is for the better by the will of Allah). God allows us to see and witness different groups to know the truth from falsehood. One group of people will be checked by another (and so forth). The point to remember here is that the entire Muslim world is being ruled by unIslamic leaders and dictators who are supported by various powers outside the Muslim world (America, Europe, Russia). The issue not about conquering or taking slaves or anything like that. The Muslims in general, and the Mujahideen in particular are fighting in defense of their lands, their people, their prisoners, their natural resources (which are the richest in the world), and their religion. Unlike western civilization, we do not separate faith and state. After the righteous Khalifah is restored and the lands return to Islam, then we will call others to Islam. And if a state (let’s take Russia for example) prevents the call of Islam or prevents those from that state who want to accept Islam from migrating to the Khaliah…then war is declared (and this becomes a war of conquest rather a defensive war). So lets say that tomorrow all the Muslim countries have been liberated and a Khalifah is re-established to unite most or all of the Muslims. At that point, the Khalifa will call the people of Russia to Islam, and we will use logical arguments and debate and other types of dawah to introduce Islam to the people of Russia (taking them out of the worship of creation and to the worship of the Creator). If this is suppressed by Russia, or if Russia prevents any of its citizens from leaving in order live under Islam, then the Khalifah may declare war on Russia until it is subdued and pays the jizyah. At that point, protecting the people of Russia becomes the responsibility of the Khalifah, and the people of Russia do not have to change their culture or convert to Islam or anything like that. Their women are for them, not us. This only changes if they insist on having power and authority over the Khalifah (as opposed to vice versa). I’ve already explained what happens then.

    This is just an example to explain the concept as well as procedure. The problem with ISIS is that they are far removed (and probably ignorant of) the entire procedure. All of the scholars of the Mujahideen have rejected ISIS. But as for the hypothetical idea that Islam will conquer the whole world…we don’t believe this will happen from a practical standpoint. Rather, we believe that events will continue to occur where various wars and conflicts of different types will happen. Then, the anti-Christ will appear and this will be the most severe of trials. The anti-christ will use the djinn to make people believe that he can resurrect the dead (for example). He will have control over the world. His defeat will convince the people of the world that Islam is the truth (as opposed to a Khaliah conquering every inch of the earth). That is when (for a time) the whole world will be Muslim, and a golden age for mankind will begin!

    I hope that this wasn’t too long of an explanation (as it encompasses many different things, but things that have to be mentioned in order to understand the complete context of what the process and procedure of an Islamic Empire is). Today, there is no Islamic Empire. The Soviet Empire has fallen (and before that, the British Empire fell). The American Empire is alive and well, with China slowly advancing to a similar status sometime in the future.

    …In so far as Islam is peaceful and respectful of other people’s right to their religious beliefs, then I say salam alaikum to them…”

    {There shall be no compulsion in religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in taaghut and believes in Allah – has grasped the most trustworthy handhold which will never break. And Allah is all-Hearing, all-Knowing} Quran 2:256

    No one can be forced into Islam. It is not allowed in our religion to force anyone to convert. But our religion is one and the same as a state, and so we are to establish an Islamic State and that State is to be a world power, with no greater authority or system of governance. No power (like the US or the UN or China or India or whoever) should have power over the Muslims. All wars and conflicts throughout history are connected in some way to a desire for power. So you either take power, or are overtaken by someone else’s power. What you have said to me about those who have hijacked western civilization and imposed the wars that are going right now upon the people of the west…they are the ones who have overtaken you in power. Our creed, from God almighty, explains this and warns against this and makes it clear then that we either accept the need to gain power, or we will fall and become subjects to the power of others (which is the case today with regards to all of the Muslim lands).

    Prophet Muhammad (saaws) said: “A time will come when the nations (of the world) will surround you from every side, just as gluttons gather around the main dish.” Somebody asked, ‘Oh Messenger of Allah, will it be on account of our fewness in numbers at that time?’ He (saaws) said, “Nay, that day you shall be numerous, but you will be like the foam and scum of the sea, and Allah will take the fear of you away from your enemies…and will place weakness into your hearts.” Somebody asked: “What is this weakness?” He (saaws) said: “The love of the world and hatred of death.” (Ahmad, Abu Dawud)

    Work in your way to take back power from those whom you believe have taken it, while the Muslims work in their own way to take back power. But I don’t want to continue this discussion without reminding you of the first and foremost obligation here (which has nothing to do with anything discussed in relation to politics, war, or similar issues). From an individual perspective (rather than a communal perspective), you must remember that Paradise is one’s final destination, and the way to reach it is through pure Monotheism (believing and worshiping God without any partners or rivals or associates or intermediaries, etc.).

    All of mankind are from Adam and Eve, and so we are all brothers and sisters in faith regardless of our race, skin pigmentation, language, culture, ethnicity, tribe, nationality, geographic birthplace, wealth, gender, abilities, intelligence, looks, etc. The ones who break this bond and this brotherhood…are those who love the worldly life more than the Hereafter; those whose pride and arrogance cause them to raise the flags of their forefathers even when they know in their hearts that it is wrong. This earth belongs to our Creator. To Him (The Most High, the Most Unique, the Most Transcendent) belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    In Islamic law, the only instance where it is permissible to have sex with someone other than your wife is when you take them as slaves when waging offensive (not defensive) war. I don’t consider this rape because such women are given food, shelter, and clothing
     
    This is a good example of both your perversion and your lies. Fact is the Koran says that slaves in general, not just those captured in war, are sexually available to the men who possess them. Mohammad himself used a coptic christian slave, who was gifted to him, as his concubine or sex toy. Throughout history muslims have bought slaves, of all races, to use sexually. They are doing it today in ISIS controlled Syria and Iraq.
  97. @Bliss

    we pray five times a day to the Creator, not to the Kabbah.
     
    You are all prostrating five times a day not to the Creator who is omnipresent but towards a man-made object, regardless of where in the world you are located. That looks like the most extreme form of idol worship that ever existed.

    You call the Kaaba the House of Allah as if the Creator needs a house to protect him from the elements he himself created.


    If you think about, what you are actually implying here can be applied to any house of worship
     
    No it can't. You obviously aren't thinking for yourself. The Kaaba is not a house of worship, it is a house you worship....from outside.</i> You are not allowed to prostrate in any other direction. Big difference.

    Bliss – I gave you a full and complete response but you ignored it and continued on with what you want to believe.

    Islam is the only true Monotheistic religion in the world…and this is on account of the Divine Attributes of Allah that are stated and explained in the Quran and Sunnah. Polytheism is not just in worshiping (other deities), but attribution and association (to the creation for something that is Unique to the Creator).

    [MORE]

    Allah is the Creator, not the creation. Nothing in the creation is comparable to the Creator. If one gives the creation any of the attributes of the Creator…then they are no longer Muslim. The Kabbah was created, has been attacked multiple times, and will be destroyed as our religion teaches us. We Prostrate only to Allah. It is Allah who has sent us Prophets and Messengers to teach us how to pray, when to pray, what purifies and what negates our prayers, the direction we are to pray no matter where in the world we are, the rituals of communal worship, the rituals of pilgrimage, how to interpret and enact the laws of God, and so on and so forth. In a situation in which we do not know where the Qibliah is, we can pray in any direction (the prayer is not nullified).

    {The East and the West belong to God. Wherever you turn, you are always in the presence of God. God is All-Encompassing, All-Knowing} Quran 2:115

    this does not contradict this…

    {We have been seeing you turning your face to the heavens. So, We will certainly assign to you a Qiblah that you would like. Now, turn your face in the direction of the Sacred Mosque (Al-Masjid-ul-Haram), and (O Muslims), wherever you are, turn your faces in its direction. Even those who have been given the Book know well that it is the truth from their Lord, and Allah is not unaware of what they do} Quran 2:144

    Masjid al-Harem is a house of worship, NOT an object of worship. There is nothing in Masjid al-Harem that we consider Divine, nor is the Kabbah a representation of God. I provided all the proofs already. The one who doesn’t want to believe will always look for an excuse.

    The Kabbah was cleansed of all idols (which the pagans had setup centuries after Abraham) and returned to the same state it was in when Prophet Abraham (as) and his sons (as) built it. If you are sincere in your interest to understand things truthfully regardless of your own beliefs, then I recommend reading some books (freely available online) on the the concept of “Tawheed”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Islam is the only true Monotheistic religion in the world
     
    Another lie. Judaism is monotheistic as well. In fact Mohammad got his monotheism from the jews, along with the stories about their prophets.

    The precursor of the strict monotheism and iconoclasm of Judaism and Islam was the short-lived strictly monotheistic cult of Akhneten in Ancient Egypt. The difference between you and those ancient egyptian cultists is that they worshipped the Sun alone, while you worship a primitive man-made structure alone: the Kaaba in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.

    Masjid al-Harem is a house of worship, NOT an object of worship.
     
    This blindness to something so obvious shows the power of brainwashing. Worshipers congregate inside a house of worship, they do not prostrate to it from outside. You are not even allowed inside the Kaaba. Nor are you allowed to prostrate to anything else. That proves that the Kaaba is not a house of worship, but a house you worship...as the House of Allah. The true God is omnipresent, it is not confined to the Kaaba.

    The Kabbah was cleansed of all idols (which the pagans had setup centuries after Abraham) and returned to the same state it was in when Prophet Abraham (as) and his sons (as) built it.
     
    Firstly, the Kaaba is an ancient temple of the pagan arabs. If it had been built by Abraham the jews would have been attached to it. That was just a made up story to justify the change of direction of prayer from Jersusalem to Mecca.

    Secondly, Mohammad and his companions began prostrating towards the Kaaba when they were still in Medina and the Kaaba was still full of idols and images: of the main pagan arab god Allah Taala, his three daughters, Jesus and Mary, and many others.
  98. @Hibernian
    You're making the same kind of arguments against Islam that extreme Protestants make against Catholicism. That kind of argument doesn't get any better with age.

    Hello Hibernian! Thanks for the comment.

    The difference is that the Protestants still believe that God is divided into three – and that Jesus (as) has Divine properties and Divine attributes. Some say Jesus (as) is the literal son of God while others say Jesus is God incarnate. There are many differing viewpoints and explanations of the Trinity just within the Protestant branch (say nothing of the other main branches). But we believe that this is a clear form of polytheism, and that the concept of trinity is a common belief and understanding between the main Christian branches – Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox Christianity, as well as most sub-branches.

    [MORE]

    Everything goes back to its root…which is the issue here and not the rituals that come afterwords. The Protestants of course take issue with additional iconography and idolatry below the basic belief in Trinity with regards to Catholicism. Returning the one of the original issues you responded to Bliss in regards to…

    If Christians were required to pray in a Church or they all had to face a certain direction (lets say towards Vatican City just as an example) whenever they prayed…then this would not be something that falls into the category of a ritual. It would not be an issue of worship since it is already understood and established that the Trinity is the central belief system for the vast majority of Christians. No one would confuse the Trinity with Vatican City (in such a scenario).

    On the other hand, the example of a person sitting in a confessional booth discussing religious matters or sharing their sinful deeds with a priest might just be a ritual, or it might be a type of polytheism. It does not become a form of idolatry or polytheism unless the worshiper actually believes that the priest has the powers or attributes of God, such as saying that the priest can forgive the other person’s sins on behalf of or in place of God! In such a case, we would dispute this and call it polytheistic because the priest has clearly attributed to himself the Divine and Unique attributes of God. The solution to polytheism of any kind, is an understanding of “Tawheed”. Of knowing the attributes of God and recognizing God in His essence and attributes as the Most Unique and Transcendent. By definition then, no object of worship can be like, equal to, a partner with, or in similitude with God. God is high above and transcendent over the creation.

    Only God can forgive our sins (not men, Prophets, or a Messiah). So one needs to pray directly to God in order to have their sins forgiven and not to any sort of intermediary between them and God. Our line to God is a direct line (so to speak). Thus, do not dial the operator or get carried away with other callers (like statues, celestial bodies, mother nature, the scientific method, etc.).

    The unification of God (as Christians and others believe) is not that same as the uniqueness of God. One can say that God is unified through a trinity or any other group of Divine beings, representations, idols, statues, incarnations, etc. But we believe that Allah is the *most* unique! So nothing can be like, or a representation of, or a son or daughter to, or an incarnation of God. Not our Scriptures, not our Prophets, not our rituals, not our prayer rugs, not our Mosques, not the Kabbah…nor any other religious symbol.

    The Creator is separate from the creation. The Creator is however, not a silent Creator (for that would be an attribute that contradicts with the attributes of Divine Love, Mercy, Justice, Law-Giver, etc.). The Creator has given us a message informing us of the reason for our creation, the purpose of our life, the laws to abide by, and stories and warnings to help us understand why things are the way they are and what is to come. Our Creator has sent Messengers and Prophets to convey God’s message and teach mankind how to abide by those rules and regulations.

    Lastly, the previous Scriptures are a part of our religion too. The root is the same…

    Allah = Yewah = Jehovah

    We worship the Father that the Christians mention, but without a Son or Holy Spirit (rather, we say that Jesus a.s. was a Messenger and Prophet of God). Jesus (as) himself worshiped the Father (so do you really think he was worshiping himself)? We do not disbelieve in the Torah and Gospels or what came before that, but believe the Quran is the final and uncorrupted Message for all of mankind (and not just the Israelites or this or that nation), while the previous scriptures were eventually corrupted. One of the ways the Quran remains in tact is that, as a book of Arabic poetry, it is has been memorized by generations and generations – a process that has continued and thus, has increased every year and every century since the death of Prophet Muhammad (saaws).

    Also, recently, the oldest Quranic manuscript was discovered…

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-33436021

    and Allah knows best

    Read More
  99. @Rurik

    Many whites hate your kind.
     
    I know

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOyBO-ts20c

    Having looked this fellow up, he was never a professor at Harvard and is an ignorant idiot. However to do him justice, he is at least consistent in opposing Zionism as well, unlike so many of his co-ethnics.

    Read More
  100. @Anonymous
    Hmm, nobody here seems to be distinguishing between endorsement of the battle flag by private citizens, on the one hand, and by state governments on the other, at taxpayers' expense. Also, nobody mentions the crucial matter of _when_ the battle flag was first hoisted over three southern state capitols. It was in the early sixties, as a symbol of massive resistance to the Civil Rights movement. It was hate, not heritage. Or rather, hate _was_ the heritage.

    I'm a white southerner, from a rural working-class family, born in 1954, the year of Brown vs The Board of Education. Almost all of my adult relatives heaped contempt upon their black neighbors at every opportunity. It was an article of faith that had to be constantly reaffirmed. My grandfather enjoyed telling stories of the lynchings he had witnessed as a boy. --It was (and still is) a pathology that traces back to Reconstruction days, when suddenly poor whites lost their legal and social "superiority" to blacks. This was a huge psychic trauma for them, a disaster for their precarious self-esteem, and their descendents carried the resentful scars long after the historical details had faded. My uneducated relatives didn't know the history; they simply _were_ the history. And when the Civil Rights era rolled around, they fell back in love with the Stars & Bars--which at that point had been relegated mostly to museums for many decades. But now it appeared in the windows of houses and shops.

    “I’m a white southerner, from a rural working-class family, born in 1954, the year of Brown vs The Board of Education. Almost all of my adult relatives heaped contempt upon their black neighbors at every opportunity”

    You’re either full of shit or descended from white trash. Or I suppose a combination of both. I’m also a white southerner, ancestors on both my father’s and mother’s side fought for the Confederacy (and in the American Revolution and French & Indian Wars prior; in WW1, and WW2, Korea, Vietnam after). I’ve never heard one of my elderly relatives “heap contempt” upon blacks. Do they consider blacks equal? No, they don’t. However there is no “hate” or “contempt” there, merely a calm view of reality. As an example a black neighbor of my grandfather (who owned a saw mill) moved from Arkansas to Detroit in the late 40′s to work in the auto plants. He called my grandfather a month or so later and said that he wanted to come home. My grandfather arranged for his transportation back to Arkansas. Would you consider a grown man that called the local white land owner to get him back home your equal?

    They saved their contempt and animosity for the white trash that should know better than to live like they do. Also for Yankees constantly poking their noses into other people’s business.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Barry - you said: "...Do they consider blacks equal? No, they don’t. However there is no “hate” or “contempt” there..."

    But there is pride, injustice, and evil there (and such viewpoints can easily become full of hate and contempt).

    You live here and now, in the age of information! You are not responsible for what they believed or did, only for your own actions and beliefs. Even if they don't have hate and contempt, they do have pride and arrogance (otherwise they would not believe as they do). More importantly, the essence of their beliefs is polytheistic, and had that not been the case, they would not have come to such conclusions nor be so superficial as to judge people based on their skin pigmentation (particularly after taking those as slaves for the sake of capitalism).

    So do not follow in their footsteps, but rather, follow in the footsteps of God's Messengers and Prophets...who were willing to abandon their own families, neighbors, nations, and tribes in order to stand up for what is right, to worship God in the most pure way, and to not associate any partners or rivals with God.

    {O you who believe! Take not for auliya' (supporters and helpers) your fathers and your brothers if they prefer disbelief to belief. And whoever of you does so, then he is one of the zalimun (wrong-doers)} Quran 9:23
  101. @Sonic
    Rurik – thank you for continuing our discussion, even though it sometimes gets very off-topic. However, the essence of this discussion still relates back to the confederate flag, southern culture and heritage, racism, and the topics that lie at the essence of the original commentary.

    Russian and American imperialism are very similar, even if one is worse than the other. Since both the US and Russia claim to be fighting a “war on terror” and in both cases, had occupation forces stationed in those countries, there is a similarity (between Iraq and Chechnya). Certainly, the destruction of Iraq exceeds that of what has been done in Chechnya since the primary aggressor there is Russia while in Iraq, the US has had a great many allies (the whole of the UN for a time in fact…including even Russia). As for Putin’s accomplishments, maybe he deserves some credit domestically. But beyond that, the best that can be said is that Putin is simply not over-reacting to the mistakes that the American Empire and NATO are making. This comes from the experience of Russia’s own failed empire more than anything else (just ask the Afghans). Oil plays a big role in Russia’s economy and its ability to stand back up after prior collapse. And there are many countries (including some in Europe) that can take care of their own people while not oppressing other nations or acting as an imperial power and playing the dirty game of global power. I think you should look to those nations as a better example of western civilization (you even mentioned some) instead of Russia.

    …You too want to see Syria utterly destroyed by head slicers and cannibals funded by the Zionists and Sunnis because Assad is of the wrong tribe and tolerates Christians (infidels) in Syria?...
     
    I would not even call the Zionists cannibals. This level of hatred and dehumanization only results from conspiracy theories and detachment from reality. I’m not saying that the anti-Assad rebels are angels by any means. But let us be fair in our criticisms. Otherwise, we cannot have an honest discussion of any kind. Head slicers are better than the mass-torture and barrel bombs that Assad’s regime is known for. Read the reports of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights as one example. And for your information, Assad’s intelligence has always cooperated with western intelligence when it comes to Islamist fighters. Assad is from a minority religion (not just a tribe or ethnic group) who empowers other minority groups by oppressing the majority. Christians who pay jizyah (which isn’t that much) have nothing to fear from an authentic Islamic State. It is wrong to say that a Sunni Muslim Emirate or Khalifah would get rid of or mass-murder all Christians. ISIS has many deviations with regards to Islamic Law and this is because they declared themselves as a Caliphate without the correct Islamic procedures – and if the foundation of something is incorrect, everything else will eventually fall into error. Assad has not had any success in stopping Zionism by the way. So let us see what happens when he is removed. Then, if another Saudi Arabia or another Turkey is created…I won’t argue with you that the Zionists did indeed fund the whole the anti-Assad resistance. But as of now, I maintain that it is a genuine Islamic Awakening and a general popular revolution against a Russian-supported dictator for which others around the world are trying to influence and hijack but do not control (take what recently happened with Division 30 as an example).

    With regards to Palestine…it is not an easy question. And don’t say that I want to cut off the heads of other Muslims as I do not support ISIS. One interesting thing that happened shortly after the declaration of the ISIS Khalifah was that Israel again attacked Gaza in brutal fashion. This self-declared Khalifah in Iraq was unable to assist them at all. Right now, guerilla warfare is the only way to resist stronger powers (whether the US in Iraq/Afghanistan, Russia in Chechnya, or Alawite-occupied Syria). It makes no sense to establish a state in such circumstances. Now tell me, particularly after the failure of the secular arab regimes in the 1967 war against Israel…is there any way to resist Israeli occupation aside from guerilla warfare (at the moment)? Since we both agree with regards to the extent of Zionist control of the US and other western countries…how do you propose to save the western world from this sort of ethnic/religious supremacist ideology? I don’t think raising or defending the confederate flag is going to do it (just to bring back some of the original topic/article into this discussion :).

    I agree that the US wants to destroy any nation that is an obstacle to Greater Israel, but the way in which this is done differs depending on who is in power. Democrats and liberals have a different way to approach the issue and protect Israel as compared to Republicans and conservatives. The same is true with regards to the different political parties within Israel (such as the Likud party vs. the Labor party). Remember Yitzhak Rabin and the price he paid for recognizing a Palestinian state. Obama has many of the same policies as Bush, but he also differs in approach and methodology though with the same hegemonic end-goal. During the Arab spring protests, we saw the corporate mainstream media try to paint those protests as protests for liberal democracy (which they certainly were not).

    For the sake of their own regional or special interests, the US would certainly the people of Libya and elsewhere to accept such a system while voting for leaders that are pro-west. But this is a fantasy and that is why such wishful thinking never came to pass. Even if you are right about Libya (remember, after Saddam’s defeat in Gulf War 2, Ghaddafi gave up his nuclear ambitions and his intelligence agency began cooperation with western intelligence agencies against the Islamist movement) that does not contradict with what I said. Even if the US wanted to get rid of Ghaddafi, that does not mean they are on the same side as the Muslims who want to get rid of Ghaddafi (for their own reasons). The world revolves around many different interests. And so, the competition that began a few years back is for influence and control over who comes to power in Libya, Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere. Will it be those who support the west and thus, zionist control of the middle east? Or will it be the Muslims who look to re-establish the Khalifah ar-Rasheed that is capable of liberating Palestine and uniting the Muslims (and will certainly protect minorities and non-Muslim groups if those groups accept the authority of the Khalifah and are thus, subdued).

    Now, the US is bombing many of those very same rebels that you may (and many online conspiracy theorists) claim are funded by the Zionists. Does that make sense? Lastly, what is your take on the nuclear deal between the US and Iran (one that Obama defends, but republicans, conservatives, neo-conservatives, aipac, and supports of the likud party oppose)?

    “…However, the bombs that are falling on the innocent Muslims of Syria are made in Russia. That is no different from the American-made bombs that are used by Israel on the defenseless people of Gaza…”

    This comment of mine from before is in relation to the bombs that Assad has and the bombs he drops on his own people…bombs that are made in Russia, sent to Iran, and then sent to Syria (or even given directly)…

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/17/us-syria-russia-arms-idUSBREA0G0MN20140117

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-04-02/putin-defies-obama-in-syria-as-arms-fuel-assad-resurgence


    I never said any race is evil. All the white Muslims in the US, Europe, Russia, Turkey, Bosnia, and the various countries in the Caucasian Mountain Region - are all my brothers. I don’t see things from any racial or ethnic perspective. America (the modern-day equivalent of the Roman Empire) is a very diverse nation with many strengths and many great accomplishments. But also many crimes and transgressions, racism, and xenophobia. Ultimately, everything happens by the will of God, and all or our accomplishments could not exist without the permission of the Creator…for everything in the creation belongs to the Creator and not to us. The race-based outlook and perspective that you have is in my opinion, the real problem here. It taints your outlook and interpretation of events as they happen, or the comments of others, or the advice others may give. It is the elephant in the room whenever articles like the one Boyd has written here are brought up. My opinion is that Islam is the solution to this. And that solution applies to everyone – from Russia to Iraq and Syria to the Sudan to China.

    “…if the Muslim’s problem with Putin is that he doesn’t allow enough non-Russian immigration into Russia, then I stand 100% with Putin…”
     
    No. I’ve already explained the problem though. A point of research might be various youtube documentaries on the Chechen war.

    “…and it doesn’t matter whether or not your religion permits rape, it’s enough that Muslims are raping school girls and young women at epidemic proportions in non-Muslim countries. Often gang rapes and there’s a whole sub-culture of Muslims that prey on these young girls and women…”
     
    No. Rape (outside of war) is an attribute of those who permit sex outside of marriage. Most rapes that occur in the west generally, and the US in particular, are not committed by Muslims (yet, how come no one ever mentions the religion of those who do commit those rapes)! If a misguided Muslim who is acting in contradiction to his own religion commits a crime like rape…then when it is broadcast, his religion is mentioned. As for everyone else, it is just their name or sometimes their race (but not their religion). This is the injustice of western news reporting or the various anti-Muslim organizations that make money off of fear-mongering and Islamophobia (which also then serves as a foundation to justify the western wars of aggression that are taking place in the Muslim world today).

    Honor is found in getting married early and not committing sexual relations of any kind before marriage. Even then, a person of principle will not commit rape. Rape is one of the most exaggerated crimes in existence…particularly since the feminist movement takes advantage of this misinformation and turns the he-said she-said nature of such accusations into a political issue and agenda! Again, religious-based morals, strong family values, a society where as many of the people are provided for (rather than cut-throat capitalism), and where people are able to get married early and have respect for the institution of marriage…is what will truly nullify this real or imagined rape epidemic. And this is something all traditional, conservative movements as well as all the major religions of the world understand. Unfortunately, an attribute of western civilization is to replace reason with faith, to force religion to become private rather than public and communal, to support fanatical individualism and to protect free speech and the arts even when such things incite the worst impulses (sexual or otherwise) from within us. The result is free-mixing, dating, alcohol, intoxication, and so forth. This is the world that has come about post-enlightenment (not one that the Zionists created – though they certainly have taken advantage of it). From the Arab pagans to the culture of Ancient Rome, Ancient Persia, Ancient Greece, and from the lands of the Sodom/Gomora to the Island of Lesbos…this has all happened before. But…

    Prophet Muhammad (saaws) said: "There will always be a group among this Ummah (nation of believers), firm upon the truth, unharmed in their faith by those that oppose them"

    “…what about the prisoners of war? They’re OK to rape? It’s not “rape”…”
     
    In Islamic law, the only instance where it is permissible to have sex with someone other than your wife is when you take them as slaves when waging offensive (not defensive) war. I don’t consider this rape because such women are given food, shelter, and clothing (as are their children if they have any). This is only after you have given those whom you are fighting a chance to sign a peace treaty, disarm, and pay the jizya tax. And that only comes into play after you have gained complete authority over a land with a legitimate Khaliah (being able to defend your airspace is an important requisite for establishing authority). Non-Muslims are protected and can even administer their own laws (an option not even allowed in western states). But if a group of non-Muslims refuses to accept the authority of the Khaliah (which is formally done through paying jizyah) and insists on fighting it (as the only other option would be exile to a far off land)…then total war is waged on them. All their fighting men are killed. The elderly, women, and children are taken as slaves. This is only time instance where slavery is allowed in Islam (and even then, there is a way and procedure to end slavery…but so long as there is war and conflict, there will be slavery of one type or another). Rape is not allowed here because the women are provided for just like one would provide for his own wife. Have you ever seen a similar option for female prisoners of war or the widows of a nation those men have been killed off by others? Rather, rape is used by every other nation or culture during times of war as a weapon of war and it usually ends in killing the woman or she is left to a life of homelessness, poverty, handouts, refugee status, etc.

    This is the solution given to man by the Creator with regards to the specific problem of female prisoners of war and widows when you have gained authority and power in the land and are conquering others (more on the issue of conquering below). Again, this is not any type of war, but specific to wars of conquest to make the word of God the highest authority in the land. Either Monotheism is the highest authority, or polytheism is (as is the case today with America’s Empire, a resurgent Russia, and the system of International Law overseen by the United Nations). By contrast, the wives of those whom the US conquers or kills – are left as widows or placed in various prison camps (and we all know what goes on there). But you don’t here too much about it because anyone who is labelled as a “terrorist” is no longer considered a human being (in the western world today), and he is dehumanized to the point where you know nothing about his wife or kids or whatever. But, the Muslims are able to (or should be) take care of their women and the families of their martyrs and prisoners because their enemies (like the US are Russia) prefer to just drop bombs or conduct secret raids (which help populate various prison camps and black sites). No news coverage is given to all of these women and children who are harmed by this, and the US and its allies prefer their victims to remain hidden and unknown. In addition, since this is called a “war on terror”, there are no negotiations with “terrorists”. So how can there be the option of a peace treaty? Rather than conquering directly, what western nations are doing is giving support, funds, and arms to police states who conquer the indigenous people for them. Again, prison, rape, and torture becomes the way that these dictatorships maintain power. So compared to that, the Islamic way of war and conquest is truly humane and just. There is no “war on terror” or other silly acronyms in Islamic law. And we do not conquer or take slaves when fighting in defense of our lands and religion (which is clearly the case today).

    When Muslims conquer others (and all this that I’m talking about is theoretical again since such actions are conditional as I’ll explain further below), they are taking slaves only from those who are die-hard in their opposition to Islam and the authority of the Khalifah. They will never stop fighting against Islam – for otherwise they would have fled, signed a peace treaty, or payed jizya. If the US or Russia were to encounter an entire nation like this, they would like simply bomb everyone in it (like what happened in Nagasaki and Hiroshima even though in this case, the Japanese were ready to surrender). The slaves of a conquered nation will see that their leaders and fighting men lied to them, and that Islam is innocent of the many lies that were told to justify such an extreme position of fighting the Khalifah even when it has overpowered all other forms of authority in a specific region.

    Also, Islam encourages us to free all slaves eventually, but one cannot just assimilate a group that was in continuous war and unwilling to accept any sort of peace treaty nor pay a small tax for the protection of the Mujahideen. Again, this is all specific to circumstances that do not exist right now. But if a non-Muslim nation or group agrees to pays the jizyah…it becomes an obligation on the Mujahideen to protect them and fight against any who attacks them (even if they are a people who are drowning in sins and polytheism). So before you think of any accusation here, remember this; remember that an Islamic Khalifah is willing to fight on behalf of non-Muslim groups and minorities and their women and children regardless of how unjust we believe their culture and objects of worship are. Non-Muslim minorities in an Islamic State are a free and protected group…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb7xKC1Ttoo

    “…a right way to “conquer others”? really?!...”
     
    Yes, because the reality is that one is either conquered or does the conquering. The various countries of the Muslim world and larger third world today exist as they do because Europe successfully conquered them over the last few centuries. The US and Russia continued upon that path. Didn’t you say earlier that it is mankind’s nature to dominate? Ultimately, someone is in charge. Yes, there can be peace treaties and thereafter, mutual trade and so forth. But any reasonably sized global power exists because it has conquered others. The US today would not exist with having conquered the Native Americans, Spanish forces and Mexicans, and the British who were deemed occupiers. And this is true of ANY empire, regional power, global power, or civilization. I’m not talking about individual nations, so don’t confuse the two.

    Now realistically, we are not going to have any one power that rules every inch of the globe – at least not yet. Technologically, the foundation for such a future one-world government and currency is being put into place – but that doesn’t mean it will ever get off the ground. Realistically, we as Muslims know that the Islamic Khailfah will not conquer the entire world…at least until the return of Jesus a.s. and the defeat of the anti-Christ as well as Yajuj and Majuj. Thus, power today as was the case yesterday is decentralized (and as a whole, that is for the better by the will of Allah). God allows us to see and witness different groups to know the truth from falsehood. One group of people will be checked by another (and so forth). The point to remember here is that the entire Muslim world is being ruled by unIslamic leaders and dictators who are supported by various powers outside the Muslim world (America, Europe, Russia). The issue not about conquering or taking slaves or anything like that. The Muslims in general, and the Mujahideen in particular are fighting in defense of their lands, their people, their prisoners, their natural resources (which are the richest in the world), and their religion. Unlike western civilization, we do not separate faith and state. After the righteous Khalifah is restored and the lands return to Islam, then we will call others to Islam. And if a state (let’s take Russia for example) prevents the call of Islam or prevents those from that state who want to accept Islam from migrating to the Khaliah…then war is declared (and this becomes a war of conquest rather a defensive war). So lets say that tomorrow all the Muslim countries have been liberated and a Khalifah is re-established to unite most or all of the Muslims. At that point, the Khalifa will call the people of Russia to Islam, and we will use logical arguments and debate and other types of dawah to introduce Islam to the people of Russia (taking them out of the worship of creation and to the worship of the Creator). If this is suppressed by Russia, or if Russia prevents any of its citizens from leaving in order live under Islam, then the Khalifah may declare war on Russia until it is subdued and pays the jizyah. At that point, protecting the people of Russia becomes the responsibility of the Khalifah, and the people of Russia do not have to change their culture or convert to Islam or anything like that. Their women are for them, not us. This only changes if they insist on having power and authority over the Khalifah (as opposed to vice versa). I’ve already explained what happens then.

    This is just an example to explain the concept as well as procedure. The problem with ISIS is that they are far removed (and probably ignorant of) the entire procedure. All of the scholars of the Mujahideen have rejected ISIS. But as for the hypothetical idea that Islam will conquer the whole world…we don’t believe this will happen from a practical standpoint. Rather, we believe that events will continue to occur where various wars and conflicts of different types will happen. Then, the anti-Christ will appear and this will be the most severe of trials. The anti-christ will use the djinn to make people believe that he can resurrect the dead (for example). He will have control over the world. His defeat will convince the people of the world that Islam is the truth (as opposed to a Khaliah conquering every inch of the earth). That is when (for a time) the whole world will be Muslim, and a golden age for mankind will begin!

    I hope that this wasn’t too long of an explanation (as it encompasses many different things, but things that have to be mentioned in order to understand the complete context of what the process and procedure of an Islamic Empire is). Today, there is no Islamic Empire. The Soviet Empire has fallen (and before that, the British Empire fell). The American Empire is alive and well, with China slowly advancing to a similar status sometime in the future.

    …In so far as Islam is peaceful and respectful of other people’s right to their religious beliefs, then I say salam alaikum to them…”
     
    {There shall be no compulsion in religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in taaghut and believes in Allah - has grasped the most trustworthy handhold which will never break. And Allah is all-Hearing, all-Knowing} Quran 2:256

    No one can be forced into Islam. It is not allowed in our religion to force anyone to convert. But our religion is one and the same as a state, and so we are to establish an Islamic State and that State is to be a world power, with no greater authority or system of governance. No power (like the US or the UN or China or India or whoever) should have power over the Muslims. All wars and conflicts throughout history are connected in some way to a desire for power. So you either take power, or are overtaken by someone else’s power. What you have said to me about those who have hijacked western civilization and imposed the wars that are going right now upon the people of the west…they are the ones who have overtaken you in power. Our creed, from God almighty, explains this and warns against this and makes it clear then that we either accept the need to gain power, or we will fall and become subjects to the power of others (which is the case today with regards to all of the Muslim lands).

    Prophet Muhammad (saaws) said: "A time will come when the nations (of the world) will surround you from every side, just as gluttons gather around the main dish." Somebody asked, 'Oh Messenger of Allah, will it be on account of our fewness in numbers at that time?' He (saaws) said, "Nay, that day you shall be numerous, but you will be like the foam and scum of the sea, and Allah will take the fear of you away from your enemies...and will place weakness into your hearts." Somebody asked: "What is this weakness?" He (saaws) said: "The love of the world and hatred of death." (Ahmad, Abu Dawud)

    Work in your way to take back power from those whom you believe have taken it, while the Muslims work in their own way to take back power. But I don’t want to continue this discussion without reminding you of the first and foremost obligation here (which has nothing to do with anything discussed in relation to politics, war, or similar issues). From an individual perspective (rather than a communal perspective), you must remember that Paradise is one’s final destination, and the way to reach it is through pure Monotheism (believing and worshiping God without any partners or rivals or associates or intermediaries, etc.).

    All of mankind are from Adam and Eve, and so we are all brothers and sisters in faith regardless of our race, skin pigmentation, language, culture, ethnicity, tribe, nationality, geographic birthplace, wealth, gender, abilities, intelligence, looks, etc. The ones who break this bond and this brotherhood…are those who love the worldly life more than the Hereafter; those whose pride and arrogance cause them to raise the flags of their forefathers even when they know in their hearts that it is wrong. This earth belongs to our Creator. To Him (The Most High, the Most Unique, the Most Transcendent) belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth.

    In Islamic law, the only instance where it is permissible to have sex with someone other than your wife is when you take them as slaves when waging offensive (not defensive) war. I don’t consider this rape because such women are given food, shelter, and clothing

    This is a good example of both your perversion and your lies. Fact is the Koran says that slaves in general, not just those captured in war, are sexually available to the men who possess them. Mohammad himself used a coptic christian slave, who was gifted to him, as his concubine or sex toy. Throughout history muslims have bought slaves, of all races, to use sexually. They are doing it today in ISIS controlled Syria and Iraq.

    Read More
  102. @Sonic
    Bliss - I gave you a full and complete response but you ignored it and continued on with what you want to believe.

    Islam is the only true Monotheistic religion in the world...and this is on account of the Divine Attributes of Allah that are stated and explained in the Quran and Sunnah. Polytheism is not just in worshiping (other deities), but attribution and association (to the creation for something that is Unique to the Creator).

    Allah is the Creator, not the creation. Nothing in the creation is comparable to the Creator. If one gives the creation any of the attributes of the Creator...then they are no longer Muslim. The Kabbah was created, has been attacked multiple times, and will be destroyed as our religion teaches us. We Prostrate only to Allah. It is Allah who has sent us Prophets and Messengers to teach us how to pray, when to pray, what purifies and what negates our prayers, the direction we are to pray no matter where in the world we are, the rituals of communal worship, the rituals of pilgrimage, how to interpret and enact the laws of God, and so on and so forth. In a situation in which we do not know where the Qibliah is, we can pray in any direction (the prayer is not nullified).

    {The East and the West belong to God. Wherever you turn, you are always in the presence of God. God is All-Encompassing, All-Knowing} Quran 2:115

    this does not contradict this...

    {We have been seeing you turning your face to the heavens. So, We will certainly assign to you a Qiblah that you would like. Now, turn your face in the direction of the Sacred Mosque (Al-Masjid-ul-Haram), and (O Muslims), wherever you are, turn your faces in its direction. Even those who have been given the Book know well that it is the truth from their Lord, and Allah is not unaware of what they do} Quran 2:144

    Masjid al-Harem is a house of worship, NOT an object of worship. There is nothing in Masjid al-Harem that we consider Divine, nor is the Kabbah a representation of God. I provided all the proofs already. The one who doesn't want to believe will always look for an excuse.

    The Kabbah was cleansed of all idols (which the pagans had setup centuries after Abraham) and returned to the same state it was in when Prophet Abraham (as) and his sons (as) built it. If you are sincere in your interest to understand things truthfully regardless of your own beliefs, then I recommend reading some books (freely available online) on the the concept of "Tawheed".

    Islam is the only true Monotheistic religion in the world

    Another lie. Judaism is monotheistic as well. In fact Mohammad got his monotheism from the jews, along with the stories about their prophets.

    The precursor of the strict monotheism and iconoclasm of Judaism and Islam was the short-lived strictly monotheistic cult of Akhneten in Ancient Egypt. The difference between you and those ancient egyptian cultists is that they worshipped the Sun alone, while you worship a primitive man-made structure alone: the Kaaba in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.

    Masjid al-Harem is a house of worship, NOT an object of worship.

    This blindness to something so obvious shows the power of brainwashing. Worshipers congregate inside a house of worship, they do not prostrate to it from outside. You are not even allowed inside the Kaaba. Nor are you allowed to prostrate to anything else. That proves that the Kaaba is not a house of worship, but a house you worship…as the House of Allah. The true God is omnipresent, it is not confined to the Kaaba.

    The Kabbah was cleansed of all idols (which the pagans had setup centuries after Abraham) and returned to the same state it was in when Prophet Abraham (as) and his sons (as) built it.

    Firstly, the Kaaba is an ancient temple of the pagan arabs. If it had been built by Abraham the jews would have been attached to it. That was just a made up story to justify the change of direction of prayer from Jersusalem to Mecca.

    Secondly, Mohammad and his companions began prostrating towards the Kaaba when they were still in Medina and the Kaaba was still full of idols and images: of the main pagan arab god Allah Taala, his three daughters, Jesus and Mary, and many others.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Bliss - All the wives of the Prophet (saaws) were Muslim and they became Muslim before he (saaws) married them, and for a reference point you can read Ibn Kathir's book on the wives of the Prophet. There was no slave or concubine that the Prophet (saaws) married who did not become Muslim first and thereafter, were freed. It is important to note that other Prophets (such as Moses) also had numerous wives. But non-Muslim sources have all sorts of accusations...so we do not follow or believe them, but use our Islamic sources to establish an authentic biography of the Prophet (saaws). Read (freely available online) "The Sealed Nectar" for a good biography/seerah.

    Slavery is the result of war, nothing less and nothing more. There is no such thing as a "sex slave" because that implies that the slave is only used for sex and then thrown away or kept in a prison. Female slaves in Islam have specific rights, mention of which are similar to that of a wife. A man is responsible for her just as they would be for their wife. If all one wanted is a sex slave...then a prostitution house is a lot easier. Just sex, and no responsibility. But that is not what the Muslims practiced nor what the Shariah allows. Concubines outside of war are not lawful (they do exist in the contemporary Arab world...but in violation of Islam rather than a result of Islam). If you want to know about Islamic laws, go to Islamic sources and not Islamaphobic/anti-Muslim sources. Perversion and lies are the way of those who ignore the religious rules and regulations from within their own scriptures (such as the Old Testament or Talmud) and instead, take slaves for the sake of economic gain or luxury, and who advocate the liberation of women through making nudity, intoxication, and per-marital sex permissible. That is the real perversion in the world today (and like I mentioned in my comments to others...all of this has happened before).

    Sex slavery exists in many parts of the world (look to Eastern Europe as one example). In these situations, the women are used only for sex and are not kept but rather, used and then gotten rid of. The men who use them do not bare any responsibility for them, and it is economic transaction rather than the result of mercy for war. Yes - I said slavery is a mercy for those who would not be taken as slaves would be left with nothing (and thus, forced to die, become beggars, or go into prostitution which is the real sex slavery you are talking about).

    Judaism is no longer Monotheistic even if it is Monotheistic in worship. The Jews have abrogated the laws of God and replaced them with secular ideologies (that is polytheism in attribution). They restrict Monotheism (of worship) to their own religion since they no longer seek to spread Judaism to others (which comes from the misguided belief that Judaism is not just a religion but also a tribe/ethnic group). Finally, Messianic Jews give Divine attributes to the Messiah - for whom they are waiting for as a result of rejecting Jesus as the Messiah. Both Christians and Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah, but we as Muslims do not say that the Messiah is God nor do we give the Messiah any sort of Divine attributes.

    Muhammad (saaws) was born a Monotheist, just like you and me. Every human being is born with a direct connection to God. But as we grow up, we are lead away from this by various religions and ideologies that seek to sever our direct connection with God and setup rivals and intermediaries instead. The religion of Islam came from Adam (as)...the first human. That is when Islam began. The essence of that Message continued until the Final Revelation - the Quran.

    The Kabbah is inside Masjid al-Haram, so of course the Muslims congregate inside this Masjid. Facing the Kabbah itself during prayer is a ritual for the purpose of uniting all Muslims no matter where they are in the world. It is a part of the rules and regulations of Islam, not a part of the attributes or characteristics of God. We do not believe God is inside the Kabbah or for that matter, inside anything. God is Transcendent and above that which He has created, not found inside or contained within any part of the creation. Again, the easiest analogy is that of a painter and a painting. God is the painter, not the painting. Anything in the painting is created (and that includes the Kabbah). We have been told to face the Qiblah for the sake of the rituals, and rituals are always a part of religion no matter what religion that is. I have already made this clear and given you clear proofs as to what our beliefs are regarding the Kabbah. If you want to continue to ignore that...then it is you who are exhibiting the power of brainwashing (perhaps out of hate and arrogance).

    Since you brought up the issue of the Jews...they also had a Qiblah that they faced during prayer, and that was towards a Temple as well. This Temple is still considered a House of Worship, and no one would accuse them of turning the Temple to an object of worship (oh, and the Jews also make pilgrimage to the Wailing Wall, yet we would not say that this is a form of idolatry). The difference between an object of worship as opposed to a house (or place or direction of worship) is simple and clear. But you do not want to acknowledge this for some reason. Idolatry is in giving something a specific Divine power or attribute (or outright worship as is the case of various statues that eastern religions pray to). It is the statues that they are worshiping (as faces or representations of God). We are not worshiping the Kabbah just as the Jews do not worship the Temple of Jerusalem or the Wailing Wall...

    "...Mizrah is the Hebrew word for "east" and the direction that Jews in the Diaspora face during prayer. Jewish law prescribes that Jews face the site of the Temple in Jerusalem during prayer. The word "mizrach" also refers to the wall of the synagogue that faces east, where seats are reserved for the rabbi and other dignitaries. In addition, "mizrach" refers to an ornamental wall plaque used to indicate the direction of prayer in Jewish homes..."
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrah
  103. @Bliss

    Islam is the only true Monotheistic religion in the world
     
    Another lie. Judaism is monotheistic as well. In fact Mohammad got his monotheism from the jews, along with the stories about their prophets.

    The precursor of the strict monotheism and iconoclasm of Judaism and Islam was the short-lived strictly monotheistic cult of Akhneten in Ancient Egypt. The difference between you and those ancient egyptian cultists is that they worshipped the Sun alone, while you worship a primitive man-made structure alone: the Kaaba in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.

    Masjid al-Harem is a house of worship, NOT an object of worship.
     
    This blindness to something so obvious shows the power of brainwashing. Worshipers congregate inside a house of worship, they do not prostrate to it from outside. You are not even allowed inside the Kaaba. Nor are you allowed to prostrate to anything else. That proves that the Kaaba is not a house of worship, but a house you worship...as the House of Allah. The true God is omnipresent, it is not confined to the Kaaba.

    The Kabbah was cleansed of all idols (which the pagans had setup centuries after Abraham) and returned to the same state it was in when Prophet Abraham (as) and his sons (as) built it.
     
    Firstly, the Kaaba is an ancient temple of the pagan arabs. If it had been built by Abraham the jews would have been attached to it. That was just a made up story to justify the change of direction of prayer from Jersusalem to Mecca.

    Secondly, Mohammad and his companions began prostrating towards the Kaaba when they were still in Medina and the Kaaba was still full of idols and images: of the main pagan arab god Allah Taala, his three daughters, Jesus and Mary, and many others.

    Bliss – All the wives of the Prophet (saaws) were Muslim and they became Muslim before he (saaws) married them, and for a reference point you can read Ibn Kathir’s book on the wives of the Prophet. There was no slave or concubine that the Prophet (saaws) married who did not become Muslim first and thereafter, were freed. It is important to note that other Prophets (such as Moses) also had numerous wives. But non-Muslim sources have all sorts of accusations…so we do not follow or believe them, but use our Islamic sources to establish an authentic biography of the Prophet (saaws). Read (freely available online) “The Sealed Nectar” for a good biography/seerah.

    [MORE]

    Slavery is the result of war, nothing less and nothing more. There is no such thing as a “sex slave” because that implies that the slave is only used for sex and then thrown away or kept in a prison. Female slaves in Islam have specific rights, mention of which are similar to that of a wife. A man is responsible for her just as they would be for their wife. If all one wanted is a sex slave…then a prostitution house is a lot easier. Just sex, and no responsibility. But that is not what the Muslims practiced nor what the Shariah allows. Concubines outside of war are not lawful (they do exist in the contemporary Arab world…but in violation of Islam rather than a result of Islam). If you want to know about Islamic laws, go to Islamic sources and not Islamaphobic/anti-Muslim sources. Perversion and lies are the way of those who ignore the religious rules and regulations from within their own scriptures (such as the Old Testament or Talmud) and instead, take slaves for the sake of economic gain or luxury, and who advocate the liberation of women through making nudity, intoxication, and per-marital sex permissible. That is the real perversion in the world today (and like I mentioned in my comments to others…all of this has happened before).

    Sex slavery exists in many parts of the world (look to Eastern Europe as one example). In these situations, the women are used only for sex and are not kept but rather, used and then gotten rid of. The men who use them do not bare any responsibility for them, and it is economic transaction rather than the result of mercy for war. Yes – I said slavery is a mercy for those who would not be taken as slaves would be left with nothing (and thus, forced to die, become beggars, or go into prostitution which is the real sex slavery you are talking about).

    Judaism is no longer Monotheistic even if it is Monotheistic in worship. The Jews have abrogated the laws of God and replaced them with secular ideologies (that is polytheism in attribution). They restrict Monotheism (of worship) to their own religion since they no longer seek to spread Judaism to others (which comes from the misguided belief that Judaism is not just a religion but also a tribe/ethnic group). Finally, Messianic Jews give Divine attributes to the Messiah – for whom they are waiting for as a result of rejecting Jesus as the Messiah. Both Christians and Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah, but we as Muslims do not say that the Messiah is God nor do we give the Messiah any sort of Divine attributes.

    Muhammad (saaws) was born a Monotheist, just like you and me. Every human being is born with a direct connection to God. But as we grow up, we are lead away from this by various religions and ideologies that seek to sever our direct connection with God and setup rivals and intermediaries instead. The religion of Islam came from Adam (as)…the first human. That is when Islam began. The essence of that Message continued until the Final Revelation – the Quran.

    The Kabbah is inside Masjid al-Haram, so of course the Muslims congregate inside this Masjid. Facing the Kabbah itself during prayer is a ritual for the purpose of uniting all Muslims no matter where they are in the world. It is a part of the rules and regulations of Islam, not a part of the attributes or characteristics of God. We do not believe God is inside the Kabbah or for that matter, inside anything. God is Transcendent and above that which He has created, not found inside or contained within any part of the creation. Again, the easiest analogy is that of a painter and a painting. God is the painter, not the painting. Anything in the painting is created (and that includes the Kabbah). We have been told to face the Qiblah for the sake of the rituals, and rituals are always a part of religion no matter what religion that is. I have already made this clear and given you clear proofs as to what our beliefs are regarding the Kabbah. If you want to continue to ignore that…then it is you who are exhibiting the power of brainwashing (perhaps out of hate and arrogance).

    Since you brought up the issue of the Jews…they also had a Qiblah that they faced during prayer, and that was towards a Temple as well. This Temple is still considered a House of Worship, and no one would accuse them of turning the Temple to an object of worship (oh, and the Jews also make pilgrimage to the Wailing Wall, yet we would not say that this is a form of idolatry). The difference between an object of worship as opposed to a house (or place or direction of worship) is simple and clear. But you do not want to acknowledge this for some reason. Idolatry is in giving something a specific Divine power or attribute (or outright worship as is the case of various statues that eastern religions pray to). It is the statues that they are worshiping (as faces or representations of God). We are not worshiping the Kabbah just as the Jews do not worship the Temple of Jerusalem or the Wailing Wall…

    “…Mizrah is the Hebrew word for “east” and the direction that Jews in the Diaspora face during prayer. Jewish law prescribes that Jews face the site of the Temple in Jerusalem during prayer. The word “mizrach” also refers to the wall of the synagogue that faces east, where seats are reserved for the rabbi and other dignitaries. In addition, “mizrach” refers to an ornamental wall plaque used to indicate the direction of prayer in Jewish homes…”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrah

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bliss

    Concubines outside of war are not lawful
     
    You are a very stubborn liar. Your prophet himself enjoyed sex with concubines outside of war. Are you calling Mohammad a sinner?

    http://www.authentictauheed.com/2013/05/maria-right-hand-possessed.html

    Maria al-Qibtiyya (Arabic: مارية القبطية)(alternatively, "Maria Qupthiya"), or Maria the Copt, (died 637) was an Egyptian Coptic Christian slave who was sent as a gift from Muqawqis, a Byzantine official, to the Holy prophet Muhammad in 628. Many sources, including Ibn QayyimAl-Jawziyya claim that she was only a concubine. She is also not mentioned in Ibn-Hisham's notes on Ibn-Ishaq's biography where he lists the wives of the Prophet Muhammad (saw). She was the mother of the Prophet Muhammad's son Ibrahim, who died in infancy age 18 months.

    The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not marry Mariyah al Qibtiyyah, rather she was a concubine who was given to him by al-Muqawqis

    The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had four concubines, one of whom was Mariyah. Ibn al-Qayyim, biography. Abu ‘Ubaydah said: He had four (concubines): Mariyah, who was the mother of his son Ibraaheem; Rayhaanah; another beautiful slave woman whom he acquired as a prisoner of war; and a slave woman who was given to him by Zaynab bintJahsh. [Zaad al-Ma’aad]

    Islam allows a man to have intercourse with his slave woman, whether he has a wife or wives or he is not married. A slave woman with whom a man has intercourse is known as a sariyyah (concubine) from the word sirr, which means marriage. This is indicated by the Quraan and Sunnah, and this was done by the Prophets. Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) took Haajar as a concubine and she bore him Ismaaeel (may peace be upon them all).

    Our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also did that, as did the Sahaabah, the righteous and the scholars. The scholars are unanimously agreed on that and it is not permissible for anyone to regard it as haraam or to forbid it. Whoever regards that as haraam is a sinner who is going against the consensus of the scholars.
    , @Bliss

    The Kabbah is inside Masjid al-Haram, so of course the Muslims congregate inside this Masjid.
     
    Now you are trying to act slippery, in other words dishonest. It is the Kaaba you are prostrating to not the Masjid al-Haram that surrounds it. The pilgrim worshippers inside that huge mosque in Mecca are in a circle prostrating and praying to the Kaaba that is in the middle. Or circling around it, declaring: I am here Allah, at your service. As if Allah is in the house. They do not, can not, enter it like one does a house of worship. To an objective observer that looks like the world's biggest gathering of idol-worshippers. The true God is omnipresent, immanent and transcendent. You don't worship such a God by prostrating to an empty building. God does not need your worship, or your animal sacrifices.

    We have been told to face the Qiblah for the sake of the rituals, and rituals are always a part of religion no matter what religion that is.
     
    So why are you so intolerant of the rituals of pagan religions? Especially considering that many of your rituals are themselves of pagan origin, including circling around the Kaaba, kissing the black meteorite etc . Probably the reason the Kaaba is called the House of Allah is because it actually used to house the idol of Allah Taala the primary deity of the pagan, pre-islamic arabs. Islam is basically a hodge podge mix of pagan, jewish and christian beliefs and rituals.
  104. @William BadWhite
    "I'm a white southerner, from a rural working-class family, born in 1954, the year of Brown vs The Board of Education. Almost all of my adult relatives heaped contempt upon their black neighbors at every opportunity"

    You're either full of shit or descended from white trash. Or I suppose a combination of both. I'm also a white southerner, ancestors on both my father's and mother's side fought for the Confederacy (and in the American Revolution and French & Indian Wars prior; in WW1, and WW2, Korea, Vietnam after). I've never heard one of my elderly relatives "heap contempt" upon blacks. Do they consider blacks equal? No, they don't. However there is no "hate" or "contempt" there, merely a calm view of reality. As an example a black neighbor of my grandfather (who owned a saw mill) moved from Arkansas to Detroit in the late 40's to work in the auto plants. He called my grandfather a month or so later and said that he wanted to come home. My grandfather arranged for his transportation back to Arkansas. Would you consider a grown man that called the local white land owner to get him back home your equal?

    They saved their contempt and animosity for the white trash that should know better than to live like they do. Also for Yankees constantly poking their noses into other people's business.

    Barry – you said: “…Do they consider blacks equal? No, they don’t. However there is no “hate” or “contempt” there…”

    But there is pride, injustice, and evil there (and such viewpoints can easily become full of hate and contempt).

    You live here and now, in the age of information! You are not responsible for what they believed or did, only for your own actions and beliefs. Even if they don’t have hate and contempt, they do have pride and arrogance (otherwise they would not believe as they do). More importantly, the essence of their beliefs is polytheistic, and had that not been the case, they would not have come to such conclusions nor be so superficial as to judge people based on their skin pigmentation (particularly after taking those as slaves for the sake of capitalism).

    So do not follow in their footsteps, but rather, follow in the footsteps of God’s Messengers and Prophets…who were willing to abandon their own families, neighbors, nations, and tribes in order to stand up for what is right, to worship God in the most pure way, and to not associate any partners or rivals with God.

    {O you who believe! Take not for auliya’ (supporters and helpers) your fathers and your brothers if they prefer disbelief to belief. And whoever of you does so, then he is one of the zalimun (wrong-doers)} Quran 9:23

    Read More
  105. @Sonic
    Bliss - All the wives of the Prophet (saaws) were Muslim and they became Muslim before he (saaws) married them, and for a reference point you can read Ibn Kathir's book on the wives of the Prophet. There was no slave or concubine that the Prophet (saaws) married who did not become Muslim first and thereafter, were freed. It is important to note that other Prophets (such as Moses) also had numerous wives. But non-Muslim sources have all sorts of accusations...so we do not follow or believe them, but use our Islamic sources to establish an authentic biography of the Prophet (saaws). Read (freely available online) "The Sealed Nectar" for a good biography/seerah.

    Slavery is the result of war, nothing less and nothing more. There is no such thing as a "sex slave" because that implies that the slave is only used for sex and then thrown away or kept in a prison. Female slaves in Islam have specific rights, mention of which are similar to that of a wife. A man is responsible for her just as they would be for their wife. If all one wanted is a sex slave...then a prostitution house is a lot easier. Just sex, and no responsibility. But that is not what the Muslims practiced nor what the Shariah allows. Concubines outside of war are not lawful (they do exist in the contemporary Arab world...but in violation of Islam rather than a result of Islam). If you want to know about Islamic laws, go to Islamic sources and not Islamaphobic/anti-Muslim sources. Perversion and lies are the way of those who ignore the religious rules and regulations from within their own scriptures (such as the Old Testament or Talmud) and instead, take slaves for the sake of economic gain or luxury, and who advocate the liberation of women through making nudity, intoxication, and per-marital sex permissible. That is the real perversion in the world today (and like I mentioned in my comments to others...all of this has happened before).

    Sex slavery exists in many parts of the world (look to Eastern Europe as one example). In these situations, the women are used only for sex and are not kept but rather, used and then gotten rid of. The men who use them do not bare any responsibility for them, and it is economic transaction rather than the result of mercy for war. Yes - I said slavery is a mercy for those who would not be taken as slaves would be left with nothing (and thus, forced to die, become beggars, or go into prostitution which is the real sex slavery you are talking about).

    Judaism is no longer Monotheistic even if it is Monotheistic in worship. The Jews have abrogated the laws of God and replaced them with secular ideologies (that is polytheism in attribution). They restrict Monotheism (of worship) to their own religion since they no longer seek to spread Judaism to others (which comes from the misguided belief that Judaism is not just a religion but also a tribe/ethnic group). Finally, Messianic Jews give Divine attributes to the Messiah - for whom they are waiting for as a result of rejecting Jesus as the Messiah. Both Christians and Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah, but we as Muslims do not say that the Messiah is God nor do we give the Messiah any sort of Divine attributes.

    Muhammad (saaws) was born a Monotheist, just like you and me. Every human being is born with a direct connection to God. But as we grow up, we are lead away from this by various religions and ideologies that seek to sever our direct connection with God and setup rivals and intermediaries instead. The religion of Islam came from Adam (as)...the first human. That is when Islam began. The essence of that Message continued until the Final Revelation - the Quran.

    The Kabbah is inside Masjid al-Haram, so of course the Muslims congregate inside this Masjid. Facing the Kabbah itself during prayer is a ritual for the purpose of uniting all Muslims no matter where they are in the world. It is a part of the rules and regulations of Islam, not a part of the attributes or characteristics of God. We do not believe God is inside the Kabbah or for that matter, inside anything. God is Transcendent and above that which He has created, not found inside or contained within any part of the creation. Again, the easiest analogy is that of a painter and a painting. God is the painter, not the painting. Anything in the painting is created (and that includes the Kabbah). We have been told to face the Qiblah for the sake of the rituals, and rituals are always a part of religion no matter what religion that is. I have already made this clear and given you clear proofs as to what our beliefs are regarding the Kabbah. If you want to continue to ignore that...then it is you who are exhibiting the power of brainwashing (perhaps out of hate and arrogance).

    Since you brought up the issue of the Jews...they also had a Qiblah that they faced during prayer, and that was towards a Temple as well. This Temple is still considered a House of Worship, and no one would accuse them of turning the Temple to an object of worship (oh, and the Jews also make pilgrimage to the Wailing Wall, yet we would not say that this is a form of idolatry). The difference between an object of worship as opposed to a house (or place or direction of worship) is simple and clear. But you do not want to acknowledge this for some reason. Idolatry is in giving something a specific Divine power or attribute (or outright worship as is the case of various statues that eastern religions pray to). It is the statues that they are worshiping (as faces or representations of God). We are not worshiping the Kabbah just as the Jews do not worship the Temple of Jerusalem or the Wailing Wall...

    "...Mizrah is the Hebrew word for "east" and the direction that Jews in the Diaspora face during prayer. Jewish law prescribes that Jews face the site of the Temple in Jerusalem during prayer. The word "mizrach" also refers to the wall of the synagogue that faces east, where seats are reserved for the rabbi and other dignitaries. In addition, "mizrach" refers to an ornamental wall plaque used to indicate the direction of prayer in Jewish homes..."
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrah

    Concubines outside of war are not lawful

    You are a very stubborn liar. Your prophet himself enjoyed sex with concubines outside of war. Are you calling Mohammad a sinner?

    http://www.authentictauheed.com/2013/05/maria-right-hand-possessed.html

    Maria al-Qibtiyya (Arabic: مارية القبطية)(alternatively, “Maria Qupthiya”), or Maria the Copt, (died 637) was an Egyptian Coptic Christian slave who was sent as a gift from Muqawqis, a Byzantine official, to the Holy prophet Muhammad in 628. Many sources, including Ibn QayyimAl-Jawziyya claim that she was only a concubine. She is also not mentioned in Ibn-Hisham’s notes on Ibn-Ishaq’s biography where he lists the wives of the Prophet Muhammad (saw). She was the mother of the Prophet Muhammad’s son Ibrahim, who died in infancy age 18 months.

    The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not marry Mariyah al Qibtiyyah, rather she was a concubine who was given to him by al-Muqawqis

    The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had four concubines, one of whom was Mariyah. Ibn al-Qayyim, biography. Abu ‘Ubaydah said: He had four (concubines): Mariyah, who was the mother of his son Ibraaheem; Rayhaanah; another beautiful slave woman whom he acquired as a prisoner of war; and a slave woman who was given to him by Zaynab bintJahsh. [Zaad al-Ma’aad]

    Islam allows a man to have intercourse with his slave woman, whether he has a wife or wives or he is not married. A slave woman with whom a man has intercourse is known as a sariyyah (concubine) from the word sirr, which means marriage. This is indicated by the Quraan and Sunnah, and this was done by the Prophets. Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) took Haajar as a concubine and she bore him Ismaaeel (may peace be upon them all).

    Our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also did that, as did the Sahaabah, the righteous and the scholars. The scholars are unanimously agreed on that and it is not permissible for anyone to regard it as haraam or to forbid it. Whoever regards that as haraam is a sinner who is going against the consensus of the scholars.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Regarding Maria al-Qibtiyya (ra), the majority of scholars believe that she became the wife of Muhammad (saaws) even though she was originally a concubine. She became a Muslim and as a result of becoming Muhammad’s (saaws) wife, her status as a slave ended. She was originally a slave, and was given as a gift to the Prophet (saaws) from the leaders of Egypt. This is a something that does not apply to us as Muslims and thus, is not something we follow or would be permissible as far as how concubines come about. Again, what some Muslims do (such as the khawarij boko haram) is not what is permitted Islam and so we have to base our statements on what the core beliefs are and what the consensus of the scholars is. One of the links you gave (authentictawheed) is from someone (Shaykh Faisal) who supports boko harem and as such, I cannot trust a great deal of what he may claim).

    Certainly, there are differences of opinion with regards to if and when Maria’s status changed from slave to wife. The sources for differing claims are the ahadith – some of which are considered as having strong authenticity (based on the chains of narration) while others are considered weak and unauthentic.

    So some scholars who follow the unauthentic ahadtih will continue to claim that she never became a wife of the Prophet (saaws). But even the weak narrations claim that she became a Muslim and thus, did not remain as a coptic Christian. And as I stated – Muslim Mujahideen are allowed to take female slaves under certain conditions, and those conditions were made clear over the course of the Revelation (all the rules and regulations were not conveyed immediately on day). As such, we have to look at all the evidences and all the narrations and study the whole of the Scriptures and not just certain parts here and there (indeed, some rulings in Islamic law, like the Divine Revelations that came before, were meant only for a specific time and context and thus, were later abrogated). The general idea of having sexual relations with a slave-girl that is acquired through wars of conquest is very much a part of our religion and I do not deny it at all (but there are specific, additional requirements for it). For most Muslims today, it is simply not applicable (but those who oppose Islam make a bigger issue out of it in order to distract from all the things that we as Muslims say and do as an example and guidance for mankind). Returning to the specific circumstances of Mariyah al-Qibtiyyah, Ibn Kathir wrote:

    “…Maria al-Qibtiyya (may Allah be pleased with her) is said to have married the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and certainly everyone gave her the same title of respect as the Prophet's wives, 'Umm al Muminin' 'Mother of the Believers'. Maria was born in upper Egypt of a Coptic father and Greek mother and moved to the court of the Muqawqis when she was still very young. She arrived in Medina to join the Prophet's household just after the Prophet returned from the treaty with Quraish which was contracted at al-Hudaybiyya…”

    And this is why I mentioned reading Ibn Kathir’s book on the Wives of the Prophet (saaws). The weight of Ibn Kathir (ra) as a scholar is much greater than that of Ibn Saad. Ibn Qayyim (ra) whom you mentioned in your comments stated that she was a concubine, but that does not mean he doesn’t hold the view that she eventually become the wife of the Prophet (saaws). Nothing in that quote denies this, rather, Ibn Qayyim (ra) is simply stating a fact as far as her (ra) origin goes. In fact, Ibn Qayyim (ra) was a student of Ibn Kathir (ra). And Ibn Kathir (ra) wrote a whole chapter on Mariyah al-Qibtiyyah (ra) in his book on the wives of the Prophet (saaws). Here is a summary of that chapter (but if one has the full book, the chapter on this should be chapter 12)…

    http://www.angelfire.com/on/ummiby1/wives4.html#maria

    Lastly, some narrations of ahadith state that Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) - the second caliph - lead the funeral procession for Mariyah al-Qibtiyyah (ra) and that she was known as one of the Mother of the Believers. The former does not happen unless one is Muslim, and the latter does not happen unless one is an actual wife of the Prophet (saaws). But even for those scholars who hold a different view and say that she was not one of the Mother of the Believers…this does not go against Islamic law.

    To conclude, it must be stated here that to try and rationalize these cultural norms, traditions, and laws from a western, contemporary perspective won’t work, at least not for the majority of people who base their moral compass on such a perspective. You mention dishonesty a lot in your comments…but the real dishonesty here is to imply that any of these things were uncommon or alien to how most people have lived their lives (not just in Arabia but in many parts of the world and in many times throughout history). The western, secular perspective (particularly after the renaissance and enlightenment in Europe) has changed things drastically, and so when you look back at history (whether religious or otherwise)…everything will appear so different. Even going back several centuries to England…arranged marriages were quite common. Yet today, whether in America or Western Europe…such marriages are rare and the exception!

    This was a different place and a different time, and again slaves and concubines were common not just in Arabia but all over the world. The Prophets that we as Muslims believe in are the same as the ones that Jews and Christians believe in. Biblical sources also attest the fact that some of the Prophets had slaves and some Prophets had numerous wives. Don’t ignore your own religious traditions when trying to signal out Muhammad (saaws). Any of us, if we go back far enough in our lineage, will probably come upon a time where slavery and polygamy were normal. It is the contemporary civilization and world view that exists now that has made such things seem strange. But that shouldn’t be the case. Many jobs today have attributes similar to slavery (or worse). So are things really different, or are the differences more cosmetic? The gap between rich and poor as well as wealthy elites vs. the poor or middle class is as great and as wide now as during any other historical time period. As I mentioned in my discussion with others, the reason illegal immigration is so pervasive in the US is because companies and corporations take advantage of the cheap labor that comes in from Mexico. Children are working in sweat shops across the third world to keep the prices of our clothes, shoes, and smartphones down! Maybe this still doesn’t qualify as slaver (or maybe, it is in fact, worse)!

    Sex for fun and pleasure outside of marriage and without any sort of commitment (even if children result) is now widespread. We think we are better because when it is time to marry, the marriage is generally monogamous…but this isn’t really the case. We ignore all the sexual partners both marriage partners had prior to their marriage (and don’t get me started on things like swingers and Ashley Madison). There is great wisdom in how things used to be done, and the limitations that were set (even though those limitations are very different from how things are now). Things are never going to be perfect, past or present…because we are imperfect beings in an imperfect world…awaiting for the Hereafter. These days, we limit that which should not be limited (like marriage partners), while discarding limitations on all that used to be limited or forbidden (like casual sex, pre-marital sex, homosexuality, nudity out in the open, and so forth). The result (and there are other factors for this too of course) is growing unhappiness, mental disease, more divorce/broken families, alienation (which can make racism worse), people waiting longer and longer to get married, less people getting married, and a general attempt to completely usurp the traditional understanding and way in which we view marriage, family life, social justice, and moral values. The belief that we are “better” or more “civilized” as compared to our pious predecessors is from the same attributes of pride and arrogance that also cause racism and a superiority complex. It is time to give up these habits and beliefs and traits and feelings Bliss.

    and Allah knows best
  106. @Sonic
    Bliss - All the wives of the Prophet (saaws) were Muslim and they became Muslim before he (saaws) married them, and for a reference point you can read Ibn Kathir's book on the wives of the Prophet. There was no slave or concubine that the Prophet (saaws) married who did not become Muslim first and thereafter, were freed. It is important to note that other Prophets (such as Moses) also had numerous wives. But non-Muslim sources have all sorts of accusations...so we do not follow or believe them, but use our Islamic sources to establish an authentic biography of the Prophet (saaws). Read (freely available online) "The Sealed Nectar" for a good biography/seerah.

    Slavery is the result of war, nothing less and nothing more. There is no such thing as a "sex slave" because that implies that the slave is only used for sex and then thrown away or kept in a prison. Female slaves in Islam have specific rights, mention of which are similar to that of a wife. A man is responsible for her just as they would be for their wife. If all one wanted is a sex slave...then a prostitution house is a lot easier. Just sex, and no responsibility. But that is not what the Muslims practiced nor what the Shariah allows. Concubines outside of war are not lawful (they do exist in the contemporary Arab world...but in violation of Islam rather than a result of Islam). If you want to know about Islamic laws, go to Islamic sources and not Islamaphobic/anti-Muslim sources. Perversion and lies are the way of those who ignore the religious rules and regulations from within their own scriptures (such as the Old Testament or Talmud) and instead, take slaves for the sake of economic gain or luxury, and who advocate the liberation of women through making nudity, intoxication, and per-marital sex permissible. That is the real perversion in the world today (and like I mentioned in my comments to others...all of this has happened before).

    Sex slavery exists in many parts of the world (look to Eastern Europe as one example). In these situations, the women are used only for sex and are not kept but rather, used and then gotten rid of. The men who use them do not bare any responsibility for them, and it is economic transaction rather than the result of mercy for war. Yes - I said slavery is a mercy for those who would not be taken as slaves would be left with nothing (and thus, forced to die, become beggars, or go into prostitution which is the real sex slavery you are talking about).

    Judaism is no longer Monotheistic even if it is Monotheistic in worship. The Jews have abrogated the laws of God and replaced them with secular ideologies (that is polytheism in attribution). They restrict Monotheism (of worship) to their own religion since they no longer seek to spread Judaism to others (which comes from the misguided belief that Judaism is not just a religion but also a tribe/ethnic group). Finally, Messianic Jews give Divine attributes to the Messiah - for whom they are waiting for as a result of rejecting Jesus as the Messiah. Both Christians and Muslims believe Jesus is the Messiah, but we as Muslims do not say that the Messiah is God nor do we give the Messiah any sort of Divine attributes.

    Muhammad (saaws) was born a Monotheist, just like you and me. Every human being is born with a direct connection to God. But as we grow up, we are lead away from this by various religions and ideologies that seek to sever our direct connection with God and setup rivals and intermediaries instead. The religion of Islam came from Adam (as)...the first human. That is when Islam began. The essence of that Message continued until the Final Revelation - the Quran.

    The Kabbah is inside Masjid al-Haram, so of course the Muslims congregate inside this Masjid. Facing the Kabbah itself during prayer is a ritual for the purpose of uniting all Muslims no matter where they are in the world. It is a part of the rules and regulations of Islam, not a part of the attributes or characteristics of God. We do not believe God is inside the Kabbah or for that matter, inside anything. God is Transcendent and above that which He has created, not found inside or contained within any part of the creation. Again, the easiest analogy is that of a painter and a painting. God is the painter, not the painting. Anything in the painting is created (and that includes the Kabbah). We have been told to face the Qiblah for the sake of the rituals, and rituals are always a part of religion no matter what religion that is. I have already made this clear and given you clear proofs as to what our beliefs are regarding the Kabbah. If you want to continue to ignore that...then it is you who are exhibiting the power of brainwashing (perhaps out of hate and arrogance).

    Since you brought up the issue of the Jews...they also had a Qiblah that they faced during prayer, and that was towards a Temple as well. This Temple is still considered a House of Worship, and no one would accuse them of turning the Temple to an object of worship (oh, and the Jews also make pilgrimage to the Wailing Wall, yet we would not say that this is a form of idolatry). The difference between an object of worship as opposed to a house (or place or direction of worship) is simple and clear. But you do not want to acknowledge this for some reason. Idolatry is in giving something a specific Divine power or attribute (or outright worship as is the case of various statues that eastern religions pray to). It is the statues that they are worshiping (as faces or representations of God). We are not worshiping the Kabbah just as the Jews do not worship the Temple of Jerusalem or the Wailing Wall...

    "...Mizrah is the Hebrew word for "east" and the direction that Jews in the Diaspora face during prayer. Jewish law prescribes that Jews face the site of the Temple in Jerusalem during prayer. The word "mizrach" also refers to the wall of the synagogue that faces east, where seats are reserved for the rabbi and other dignitaries. In addition, "mizrach" refers to an ornamental wall plaque used to indicate the direction of prayer in Jewish homes..."
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrah

    The Kabbah is inside Masjid al-Haram, so of course the Muslims congregate inside this Masjid.

    Now you are trying to act slippery, in other words dishonest. It is the Kaaba you are prostrating to not the Masjid al-Haram that surrounds it. The pilgrim worshippers inside that huge mosque in Mecca are in a circle prostrating and praying to the Kaaba that is in the middle. Or circling around it, declaring: I am here Allah, at your service. As if Allah is in the house. They do not, can not, enter it like one does a house of worship. To an objective observer that looks like the world’s biggest gathering of idol-worshippers. The true God is omnipresent, immanent and transcendent. You don’t worship such a God by prostrating to an empty building. God does not need your worship, or your animal sacrifices.

    We have been told to face the Qiblah for the sake of the rituals, and rituals are always a part of religion no matter what religion that is.

    So why are you so intolerant of the rituals of pagan religions? Especially considering that many of your rituals are themselves of pagan origin, including circling around the Kaaba, kissing the black meteorite etc . Probably the reason the Kaaba is called the House of Allah is because it actually used to house the idol of Allah Taala the primary deity of the pagan, pre-islamic arabs. Islam is basically a hodge podge mix of pagan, jewish and christian beliefs and rituals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sonic
    Bliss - I'm glad you stated some of your own views here because it helps me to better explain to you where you might be getting things mixed up.

    “…It is the Kaaba you are prostrating to not the Masjid al-Haram that surrounds it…”
     
    No, it is Allah to whom we prostrate to. We pray in the direction of the Kabbah which is inside Masjid al-Harem. This is our Qiblah. This has already been explained thoroughly…you have ignored everything I’ve written on the matter so you are clearly being dishonest. Why do you call me dishonest when I consider your points and respond to them, while you ignore the vast majority of the points I make?

    “…The true God is omnipresent, immanent and transcendent…”
     
    So this is your belief, right? To start with, let us use the definition of immanence here so that we are somewhat on the same page…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanence

    In particular, pay attention to the last sentence of this quote and what I italicized:

    Immanence refers to those philosophical and metaphysical theories of divine presence in which the divine encompasses or is manifested in the material world. Immanence is usually applied in monotheistic, pantheistic, pandeistic, or panentheistic faiths to suggest that the spiritual world permeates the mundane. It is often contrasted with theories of transcendence, in which the divine is seen to be outside the material world.

    So no – I believe your view on God and the attributes you give are incorrect since they are contradictory with one another. This will hopefully show you and others the difference between Islam and other religions and belief systems. God is Transcendent, but NOT immanent. These two terms are a contradiction of one another based a simple understanding of each (but one has to be careful of the definitions they use before beginning on a discussion of how these two terms differ).

    Saying that God is immanent is to say that God is within His creation. So the painter is not just outside of the painting, but also in the painting. This is an incorrect and misunderstood belief (which becomes polytheistic once a person understands its implications). Immanence justifies any and every form of polytheism (so long as the polytheists don’t limit such immanence). An immanent god can thus, be found within a human being (like Jesus), or within mother nature (which many pagans worship), or within a statue, stone, building, place of worship, celestial body, etc. Indeed, it is a contradiction for you to claim that God is immanent, yet critique idolatry at the same time, since immanence can allow for any part of creation to claim Divine properties or attributes.

    In Islam, God’s transcendence is complete, pure, and unique. God is the Most Transcendent, or the Most High…not just sometimes transcendent or partially transcendent. Immanence puts God within His creation, stating that God is present everywhere and in everything. Sure, some types of religions limit that immanence to a specific thing, or specific idol, or specific statue, etc. - but those who study immanence and who often makeup the scholarly justifications for various polytheistic religions and belief systems, see immanence in a more pue and complete form (the way we view transcendence). Many also want to believe in some level of both immanence and transcendence. So they will say that this person or thing or idol is only a representation of God; a face of God...and that God is also in other things (or everything). You often bring up the idolatry that used to exist in the Kabbah and among the pagans of Arabia. They still believed in Allah as a Transcendent, Creator God. But they also believed in other gods and idols as having Divide properties. This is a result of giving God the attribute of Immanence! But, Transcendence is truly the opposite of this sort of immanence.

    Immanence = Unification (i.e. God is within some things or within everything). So God is unified through various various idols and constructions and so forth, as well as outside those idols and constructions.

    Transcendence (in its purest and most authentic form) = Uniqueness (i.e. God is unlike that which God creates and not found inside or within that which is created).

    God is not inside you or me or any of the Prophets, or in a House of worship, or in the Kabbah, or at the Wailing Wall, or in a celestial body, or inside of a Djinn/Demon, or anything else that is created. God is high above and transcendent over all that is in space and time!

    As for omnipresence, this is also subject to the basic foundation of God’s attributes of Transcendence/Uniqueness/Highness. God is all-Hearing and all-Knowing and all-Seeing. But just because God knows everything – that does not mean God is in everything that He knows. Again, the Creator is separate from the creation. God knows about every single atom, quark, or dust particle that is a part of the creation. Yet, without being present within that creation. So, it would be more accurate from the perspective of Pure Monotheism and Transcendence to say that God has the property of Omniscience rather than Omnipresence. And God’s Omniscience still allows us to say that wherever you are or wherever you turn, God is with you and can hear you and see you and knows all that you show and all that you conceal. A painter knows everything about his painting (the past, present, and future of the painting) without being inside or a part of or present within the painting!

    So again, in Islam, Allah is outside the creation (not within the Kabbah or within a Mosque or within a person or anything else), which is not the case with regards to the idols and the understanding of the Divine that the Meccan pagans worshiped, or the statues that Hindus and Buddhists worship, or the Trinity of the Christians, etc.

    Please note that some people might still use these terms in a different way because they define them a little differently or mean one thing even when they talk about something else (so a lot of times people say God is omnipresent even when they mean omniscience, or they define omnipresence in a different way). Concentrate more on the underlying concepts rather than the specific terms (which could have different definitions depending on who you are talking to and how much they know or what sort of background they are coming from). Also note that a lot of this discussion relates to the attributes of God and polytheism in attribution. Not the basic worship of God – which is what we are all held to account for. The attributes of God are something we have to learn or study (and only then become responsible for it).

    “…God does not need your worship, or your animal sacrifices…”
     
    Remember that one of God’s Prophets was asked to sacrifice his own son, and this is a story that Muslims, Christians, and Jews are all in agreement with. God intervened of course and so the son of Abraham (as) was not sacrificed. Any and all of our sacrifices for God are done as a test of our faith…not because God needs that which we sacrifice from ourselves or others. Animals are killed and eaten every day – so why would one ever hesitate to do it in God’s name, or for the sake of a specific sacrifice that God commands!? In our faith, the Eid sacrifice of an animal is in commemoration for the act of Prophet Abraham (as), and the animal is then given to the poor. Other than that, we are not supposed to eat the meat of any animal that isn’t taken in the name of God and isn’t killed in a humane way with specific methods as a minimum requirement. That applies all the time and in all circumstances (with some scholars permitting the meat of animals slaughtered by the people of the book i.e. Jews and Christians).

    God doesn’t need anything from us. God does not need us to believe in Him, nor our prayers, nor our good deeds or acts of charity. Everything we do is for the pleasure of God and with the hope that God will accept it and reward us with paradise. The creation are slaves to the Creator. God is our master, and has no need for us. Our adherence to God’s rules and regulations, warnings and commandments, prayers and prayer procedures, direction of prayer (for the sake of unity), supplication/dua (which can be done at any time and in any direction), and other required as well as voluntary acts…is for our own benefit. It is for our own purity, our own understanding, our own success, and our own record. A record that will be presented to our Creator on the Day of Judgement with the hope (not guarantee) of winning the reward of Eternal bliss!

    “…So why are you so intolerant of the rituals of pagan religions? Especially considering that many of your rituals are themselves of pagan origin…”
     
    We believe the rituals were originally part of Monotheism. This explains any commonality (as opposed to the other way around). Other rituals are completely different. Once Again, Islam began with Adam and Eve - the first human beings. We are all from their progeny and lineage. One reason people fell into polytheism is on account of the djinn (evil demons) fooling them into thinking that certain statues, stones, animals, plants, celestial bodies, etc. have Divine powers or characteristics. The greatest sin any human being can commit is polytheism (particularly in worship). Every child is born a Muslim (Muslim in the sense of their soul submitting to the one God and thus, being monotheistic…not in terms of knowing the rituals of Islam as a religion). Those who commit polytheism of attribution are held to account once knowledge comes to them with regards to those Divine attributes. Lastly, as a rhetorical question…pagans pray, do they not? So should we not pray just because we would be practicing a ritual that the pagans also do? Of course not. The pagans pray to that which is created. We pray (and prostate to) the Creator alone, without any partners or associates.

    “…the idol of Allah Taala the primary deity of the pagan, pre-islamic arabs. Islam is basically a hodge podge mix of pagan, jewish and christian beliefs and rituals…”
     
    Even the Meccan pagans recognized Allah as the Creator…but they then believed in other gods and thus, setup partners/idols with God. The Arab Christians also state Allah as the “Father/Jehovah” and that is the term used in the Arabic Bible. You have not researched this matter, but because of your general antagonism towards Islam, you assume anything that anyone may claim about Islam as correct. Go to the Christian Arab communities and ask them yourself. Once more…

    Allah = Yahweh = Jehovah
  107. @Bliss

    Concubines outside of war are not lawful
     
    You are a very stubborn liar. Your prophet himself enjoyed sex with concubines outside of war. Are you calling Mohammad a sinner?

    http://www.authentictauheed.com/2013/05/maria-right-hand-possessed.html

    Maria al-Qibtiyya (Arabic: مارية القبطية)(alternatively, "Maria Qupthiya"), or Maria the Copt, (died 637) was an Egyptian Coptic Christian slave who was sent as a gift from Muqawqis, a Byzantine official, to the Holy prophet Muhammad in 628. Many sources, including Ibn QayyimAl-Jawziyya claim that she was only a concubine. She is also not mentioned in Ibn-Hisham's notes on Ibn-Ishaq's biography where he lists the wives of the Prophet Muhammad (saw). She was the mother of the Prophet Muhammad's son Ibrahim, who died in infancy age 18 months.

    The Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not marry Mariyah al Qibtiyyah, rather she was a concubine who was given to him by al-Muqawqis

    The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had four concubines, one of whom was Mariyah. Ibn al-Qayyim, biography. Abu ‘Ubaydah said: He had four (concubines): Mariyah, who was the mother of his son Ibraaheem; Rayhaanah; another beautiful slave woman whom he acquired as a prisoner of war; and a slave woman who was given to him by Zaynab bintJahsh. [Zaad al-Ma’aad]

    Islam allows a man to have intercourse with his slave woman, whether he has a wife or wives or he is not married. A slave woman with whom a man has intercourse is known as a sariyyah (concubine) from the word sirr, which means marriage. This is indicated by the Quraan and Sunnah, and this was done by the Prophets. Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) took Haajar as a concubine and she bore him Ismaaeel (may peace be upon them all).

    Our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also did that, as did the Sahaabah, the righteous and the scholars. The scholars are unanimously agreed on that and it is not permissible for anyone to regard it as haraam or to forbid it. Whoever regards that as haraam is a sinner who is going against the consensus of the scholars.

    Regarding Maria al-Qibtiyya (ra), the majority of scholars believe that she became the wife of Muhammad (saaws) even though she was originally a concubine. She became a Muslim and as a result of becoming Muhammad’s (saaws) wife, her status as a slave ended. She was originally a slave, and was given as a gift to the Prophet (saaws) from the leaders of Egypt. This is a something that does not apply to us as Muslims and thus, is not something we follow or would be permissible as far as how concubines come about. Again, what some Muslims do (such as the khawarij boko haram) is not what is permitted Islam and so we have to base our statements on what the core beliefs are and what the consensus of the scholars is. One of the links you gave (authentictawheed) is from someone (Shaykh Faisal) who supports boko harem and as such, I cannot trust a great deal of what he may claim).

    [MORE]

    Certainly, there are differences of opinion with regards to if and when Maria’s status changed from slave to wife. The sources for differing claims are the ahadith – some of which are considered as having strong authenticity (based on the chains of narration) while others are considered weak and unauthentic.

    So some scholars who follow the unauthentic ahadtih will continue to claim that she never became a wife of the Prophet (saaws). But even the weak narrations claim that she became a Muslim and thus, did not remain as a coptic Christian. And as I stated – Muslim Mujahideen are allowed to take female slaves under certain conditions, and those conditions were made clear over the course of the Revelation (all the rules and regulations were not conveyed immediately on day). As such, we have to look at all the evidences and all the narrations and study the whole of the Scriptures and not just certain parts here and there (indeed, some rulings in Islamic law, like the Divine Revelations that came before, were meant only for a specific time and context and thus, were later abrogated). The general idea of having sexual relations with a slave-girl that is acquired through wars of conquest is very much a part of our religion and I do not deny it at all (but there are specific, additional requirements for it). For most Muslims today, it is simply not applicable (but those who oppose Islam make a bigger issue out of it in order to distract from all the things that we as Muslims say and do as an example and guidance for mankind). Returning to the specific circumstances of Mariyah al-Qibtiyyah, Ibn Kathir wrote:

    “…Maria al-Qibtiyya (may Allah be pleased with her) is said to have married the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and certainly everyone gave her the same title of respect as the Prophet’s wives, ‘Umm al Muminin’ ‘Mother of the Believers’. Maria was born in upper Egypt of a Coptic father and Greek mother and moved to the court of the Muqawqis when she was still very young. She arrived in Medina to join the Prophet’s household just after the Prophet returned from the treaty with Quraish which was contracted at al-Hudaybiyya…”

    And this is why I mentioned reading Ibn Kathir’s book on the Wives of the Prophet (saaws). The weight of Ibn Kathir (ra) as a scholar is much greater than that of Ibn Saad. Ibn Qayyim (ra) whom you mentioned in your comments stated that she was a concubine, but that does not mean he doesn’t hold the view that she eventually become the wife of the Prophet (saaws). Nothing in that quote denies this, rather, Ibn Qayyim (ra) is simply stating a fact as far as her (ra) origin goes. In fact, Ibn Qayyim (ra) was a student of Ibn Kathir (ra). And Ibn Kathir (ra) wrote a whole chapter on Mariyah al-Qibtiyyah (ra) in his book on the wives of the Prophet (saaws). Here is a summary of that chapter (but if one has the full book, the chapter on this should be chapter 12)…

    http://www.angelfire.com/on/ummiby1/wives4.html#maria

    Lastly, some narrations of ahadith state that Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) – the second caliph – lead the funeral procession for Mariyah al-Qibtiyyah (ra) and that she was known as one of the Mother of the Believers. The former does not happen unless one is Muslim, and the latter does not happen unless one is an actual wife of the Prophet (saaws). But even for those scholars who hold a different view and say that she was not one of the Mother of the Believers…this does not go against Islamic law.

    To conclude, it must be stated here that to try and rationalize these cultural norms, traditions, and laws from a western, contemporary perspective won’t work, at least not for the majority of people who base their moral compass on such a perspective. You mention dishonesty a lot in your comments…but the real dishonesty here is to imply that any of these things were uncommon or alien to how most people have lived their lives (not just in Arabia but in many parts of the world and in many times throughout history). The western, secular perspective (particularly after the renaissance and enlightenment in Europe) has changed things drastically, and so when you look back at history (whether religious or otherwise)…everything will appear so different. Even going back several centuries to England…arranged marriages were quite common. Yet today, whether in America or Western Europe…such marriages are rare and the exception!

    This was a different place and a different time, and again slaves and concubines were common not just in Arabia but all over the world. The Prophets that we as Muslims believe in are the same as the ones that Jews and Christians believe in. Biblical sources also attest the fact that some of the Prophets had slaves and some Prophets had numerous wives. Don’t ignore your own religious traditions when trying to signal out Muhammad (saaws). Any of us, if we go back far enough in our lineage, will probably come upon a time where slavery and polygamy were normal. It is the contemporary civilization and world view that exists now that has made such things seem strange. But that shouldn’t be the case. Many jobs today have attributes similar to slavery (or worse). So are things really different, or are the differences more cosmetic? The gap between rich and poor as well as wealthy elites vs. the poor or middle class is as great and as wide now as during any other historical time period. As I mentioned in my discussion with others, the reason illegal immigration is so pervasive in the US is because companies and corporations take advantage of the cheap labor that comes in from Mexico. Children are working in sweat shops across the third world to keep the prices of our clothes, shoes, and smartphones down! Maybe this still doesn’t qualify as slaver (or maybe, it is in fact, worse)!

    Sex for fun and pleasure outside of marriage and without any sort of commitment (even if children result) is now widespread. We think we are better because when it is time to marry, the marriage is generally monogamous…but this isn’t really the case. We ignore all the sexual partners both marriage partners had prior to their marriage (and don’t get me started on things like swingers and Ashley Madison). There is great wisdom in how things used to be done, and the limitations that were set (even though those limitations are very different from how things are now). Things are never going to be perfect, past or present…because we are imperfect beings in an imperfect world…awaiting for the Hereafter. These days, we limit that which should not be limited (like marriage partners), while discarding limitations on all that used to be limited or forbidden (like casual sex, pre-marital sex, homosexuality, nudity out in the open, and so forth). The result (and there are other factors for this too of course) is growing unhappiness, mental disease, more divorce/broken families, alienation (which can make racism worse), people waiting longer and longer to get married, less people getting married, and a general attempt to completely usurp the traditional understanding and way in which we view marriage, family life, social justice, and moral values. The belief that we are “better” or more “civilized” as compared to our pious predecessors is from the same attributes of pride and arrogance that also cause racism and a superiority complex. It is time to give up these habits and beliefs and traits and feelings Bliss.

    and Allah knows best

    Read More
  108. @Bliss

    The Kabbah is inside Masjid al-Haram, so of course the Muslims congregate inside this Masjid.
     
    Now you are trying to act slippery, in other words dishonest. It is the Kaaba you are prostrating to not the Masjid al-Haram that surrounds it. The pilgrim worshippers inside that huge mosque in Mecca are in a circle prostrating and praying to the Kaaba that is in the middle. Or circling around it, declaring: I am here Allah, at your service. As if Allah is in the house. They do not, can not, enter it like one does a house of worship. To an objective observer that looks like the world's biggest gathering of idol-worshippers. The true God is omnipresent, immanent and transcendent. You don't worship such a God by prostrating to an empty building. God does not need your worship, or your animal sacrifices.

    We have been told to face the Qiblah for the sake of the rituals, and rituals are always a part of religion no matter what religion that is.
     
    So why are you so intolerant of the rituals of pagan religions? Especially considering that many of your rituals are themselves of pagan origin, including circling around the Kaaba, kissing the black meteorite etc . Probably the reason the Kaaba is called the House of Allah is because it actually used to house the idol of Allah Taala the primary deity of the pagan, pre-islamic arabs. Islam is basically a hodge podge mix of pagan, jewish and christian beliefs and rituals.

    Bliss – I’m glad you stated some of your own views here because it helps me to better explain to you where you might be getting things mixed up.

    [MORE]

    “…It is the Kaaba you are prostrating to not the Masjid al-Haram that surrounds it…”

    No, it is Allah to whom we prostrate to. We pray in the direction of the Kabbah which is inside Masjid al-Harem. This is our Qiblah. This has already been explained thoroughly…you have ignored everything I’ve written on the matter so you are clearly being dishonest. Why do you call me dishonest when I consider your points and respond to them, while you ignore the vast majority of the points I make?

    “…The true God is omnipresent, immanent and transcendent…”

    So this is your belief, right? To start with, let us use the definition of immanence here so that we are somewhat on the same page…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanence

    In particular, pay attention to the last sentence of this quote and what I italicized:

    Immanence refers to those philosophical and metaphysical theories of divine presence in which the divine encompasses or is manifested in the material world. Immanence is usually applied in monotheistic, pantheistic, pandeistic, or panentheistic faiths to suggest that the spiritual world permeates the mundane. It is often contrasted with theories of transcendence, in which the divine is seen to be outside the material world.

    So no – I believe your view on God and the attributes you give are incorrect since they are contradictory with one another. This will hopefully show you and others the difference between Islam and other religions and belief systems. God is Transcendent, but NOT immanent. These two terms are a contradiction of one another based a simple understanding of each (but one has to be careful of the definitions they use before beginning on a discussion of how these two terms differ).

    Saying that God is immanent is to say that God is within His creation. So the painter is not just outside of the painting, but also in the painting. This is an incorrect and misunderstood belief (which becomes polytheistic once a person understands its implications). Immanence justifies any and every form of polytheism (so long as the polytheists don’t limit such immanence). An immanent god can thus, be found within a human being (like Jesus), or within mother nature (which many pagans worship), or within a statue, stone, building, place of worship, celestial body, etc. Indeed, it is a contradiction for you to claim that God is immanent, yet critique idolatry at the same time, since immanence can allow for any part of creation to claim Divine properties or attributes.

    In Islam, God’s transcendence is complete, pure, and unique. God is the Most Transcendent, or the Most High…not just sometimes transcendent or partially transcendent. Immanence puts God within His creation, stating that God is present everywhere and in everything. Sure, some types of religions limit that immanence to a specific thing, or specific idol, or specific statue, etc. – but those who study immanence and who often makeup the scholarly justifications for various polytheistic religions and belief systems, see immanence in a more pue and complete form (the way we view transcendence). Many also want to believe in some level of both immanence and transcendence. So they will say that this person or thing or idol is only a representation of God; a face of God…and that God is also in other things (or everything). You often bring up the idolatry that used to exist in the Kabbah and among the pagans of Arabia. They still believed in Allah as a Transcendent, Creator God. But they also believed in other gods and idols as having Divide properties. This is a result of giving God the attribute of Immanence! But, Transcendence is truly the opposite of this sort of immanence.

    Immanence = Unification (i.e. God is within some things or within everything). So God is unified through various various idols and constructions and so forth, as well as outside those idols and constructions.

    Transcendence (in its purest and most authentic form) = Uniqueness (i.e. God is unlike that which God creates and not found inside or within that which is created).

    God is not inside you or me or any of the Prophets, or in a House of worship, or in the Kabbah, or at the Wailing Wall, or in a celestial body, or inside of a Djinn/Demon, or anything else that is created. God is high above and transcendent over all that is in space and time!

    As for omnipresence, this is also subject to the basic foundation of God’s attributes of Transcendence/Uniqueness/Highness. God is all-Hearing and all-Knowing and all-Seeing. But just because God knows everything – that does not mean God is in everything that He knows. Again, the Creator is separate from the creation. God knows about every single atom, quark, or dust particle that is a part of the creation. Yet, without being present within that creation. So, it would be more accurate from the perspective of Pure Monotheism and Transcendence to say that God has the property of Omniscience rather than Omnipresence. And God’s Omniscience still allows us to say that wherever you are or wherever you turn, God is with you and can hear you and see you and knows all that you show and all that you conceal. A painter knows everything about his painting (the past, present, and future of the painting) without being inside or a part of or present within the painting!

    So again, in Islam, Allah is outside the creation (not within the Kabbah or within a Mosque or within a person or anything else), which is not the case with regards to the idols and the understanding of the Divine that the Meccan pagans worshiped, or the statues that Hindus and Buddhists worship, or the Trinity of the Christians, etc.

    Please note that some people might still use these terms in a different way because they define them a little differently or mean one thing even when they talk about something else (so a lot of times people say God is omnipresent even when they mean omniscience, or they define omnipresence in a different way). Concentrate more on the underlying concepts rather than the specific terms (which could have different definitions depending on who you are talking to and how much they know or what sort of background they are coming from). Also note that a lot of this discussion relates to the attributes of God and polytheism in attribution. Not the basic worship of God – which is what we are all held to account for. The attributes of God are something we have to learn or study (and only then become responsible for it).

    “…God does not need your worship, or your animal sacrifices…”

    Remember that one of God’s Prophets was asked to sacrifice his own son, and this is a story that Muslims, Christians, and Jews are all in agreement with. God intervened of course and so the son of Abraham (as) was not sacrificed. Any and all of our sacrifices for God are done as a test of our faith…not because God needs that which we sacrifice from ourselves or others. Animals are killed and eaten every day – so why would one ever hesitate to do it in God’s name, or for the sake of a specific sacrifice that God commands!? In our faith, the Eid sacrifice of an animal is in commemoration for the act of Prophet Abraham (as), and the animal is then given to the poor. Other than that, we are not supposed to eat the meat of any animal that isn’t taken in the name of God and isn’t killed in a humane way with specific methods as a minimum requirement. That applies all the time and in all circumstances (with some scholars permitting the meat of animals slaughtered by the people of the book i.e. Jews and Christians).

    God doesn’t need anything from us. God does not need us to believe in Him, nor our prayers, nor our good deeds or acts of charity. Everything we do is for the pleasure of God and with the hope that God will accept it and reward us with paradise. The creation are slaves to the Creator. God is our master, and has no need for us. Our adherence to God’s rules and regulations, warnings and commandments, prayers and prayer procedures, direction of prayer (for the sake of unity), supplication/dua (which can be done at any time and in any direction), and other required as well as voluntary acts…is for our own benefit. It is for our own purity, our own understanding, our own success, and our own record. A record that will be presented to our Creator on the Day of Judgement with the hope (not guarantee) of winning the reward of Eternal bliss!

    “…So why are you so intolerant of the rituals of pagan religions? Especially considering that many of your rituals are themselves of pagan origin…”

    We believe the rituals were originally part of Monotheism. This explains any commonality (as opposed to the other way around). Other rituals are completely different. Once Again, Islam began with Adam and Eve – the first human beings. We are all from their progeny and lineage. One reason people fell into polytheism is on account of the djinn (evil demons) fooling them into thinking that certain statues, stones, animals, plants, celestial bodies, etc. have Divine powers or characteristics. The greatest sin any human being can commit is polytheism (particularly in worship). Every child is born a Muslim (Muslim in the sense of their soul submitting to the one God and thus, being monotheistic…not in terms of knowing the rituals of Islam as a religion). Those who commit polytheism of attribution are held to account once knowledge comes to them with regards to those Divine attributes. Lastly, as a rhetorical question…pagans pray, do they not? So should we not pray just because we would be practicing a ritual that the pagans also do? Of course not. The pagans pray to that which is created. We pray (and prostate to) the Creator alone, without any partners or associates.

    “…the idol of Allah Taala the primary deity of the pagan, pre-islamic arabs. Islam is basically a hodge podge mix of pagan, jewish and christian beliefs and rituals…”

    Even the Meccan pagans recognized Allah as the Creator…but they then believed in other gods and thus, setup partners/idols with God. The Arab Christians also state Allah as the “Father/Jehovah” and that is the term used in the Arabic Bible. You have not researched this matter, but because of your general antagonism towards Islam, you assume anything that anyone may claim about Islam as correct. Go to the Christian Arab communities and ask them yourself. Once more…

    Allah = Yahweh = Jehovah

    Read More
  109. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous
    For my part I must admit to a personal view of this controversy. My kin were on both sides, Union and Confederate. Brother fought brother, cousin against cousin, uncles and nephews chose different sides. One flew the Stars and Stripes, the other fought under the Battle Flag. They fought hard and killed they each other. But, even in the midst of battle, sometimes a cheer would go up from the Union lines to the Confederates or from the Confederates to their Union adversaries- one side honoring the other for its bravery and valor. I see it as the same with flying the Battle Flag. My forefathers, who fought for the Union, so respected my kin, who fought for the Confederacy, that they granted them the right to fly their Battle Flag after the War. That's the way it is in families.
    I suggest to you, and to any others who have a problem with this- just leave it alone. It's a family matter and unless you can prove yours were there, you get no say.

    In America, they do get to voice an opinion, regardless of how impersonal or ignorant it is. That’s the real issue here.

    Read More
  110. @War for Blair Mountain
    The Democratic Party in DC has murdered over two thousand Conservative Orthodox Christian Russian Speaking Ukranians in the past year...including a young pregnant Orthodox Christian Russian Ukranian Woman who was hanged from a street light. I value this young women's life way more than Cecil the f.....g Lion's life.

    The Democratic Party is the number one terrorist organization on the Planet.

    what a bold-faced lie!

    Read More
  111. This piece omits the role of the Confederate battle flag as a symbol of the resistance to the Reconstruction. That resistance gave rise to the Ku Klux Klan and sundry “outlaws” that used violence against federal authority and those who co-operated with it. From its origins as a standard in battle it was embraced as a symbol of the ideology that spawned Jim Crow laws and nearly a century of lynchings. The State of South Carolina added the Confederate battle flag to its State flag as a direct response to the Civil Rights movement. There is no escaping the fact that that it became a symbol of ideologies based on marginalization and hate.

    That bit about it merely being the Cross of Saint Andrew with stars is sheer sophistry. The Cross of Saint Andrew as a religious symbol never had stars on it. Those stars change the meaning entirely. It is equally logical to claim that a Swastika is merely an ancient Runic symbol. When we see the tilted Swastika we know exactly what it means ideologically, just as we do when we see a “Cross of Saint Andrew with stars.”

    Cathey is both disingenuous and stupid.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.