The Unz Review - Mobile

The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection

A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 The Saker Archive
Russia's "Civilizational Choice"

Email This Page to Someone


 Remember My Information



=>

Moscow’s New Cathedral Mosque. Credit: Interpretermag

This week, Vladimir Putin and a large number of national and foreign dignitaries and guests have inaugurated the biggest mosque in Europe: the new Moscow Cathedral Mosque. This was a big event, much awaited by the many tens of thousands of Russian Muslims who live in the Russian capital and who, in the past, have had to pray in the streets due to the lack of a mosque big enough to accommodate them all. This event, however, has a significance which much exceeds just the local lack of space. The truth is that most Muslims who prayed in the Moscow city center wanted more than just a bigger building – they wanted an official acknowledgement of their existence and of their importance for Russia. Now this much awaited acknowledgement has finally happened and the famous Moscow city center will feature 240 foot tall golden minarets which will elegantly complement the traditional Orthodox cupolas. But I would argue that this event is even bigger than just a recognition of the role Islam plays in modern Russia – I believe it to be the expression of a profound civilizational choice.

We have heard a lot about “civilizational choices” in the context of the Ukrainian civil war. The Western propaganda machine turned what was a struggle between various Ukrainian oligarchs into a “civilizational choice”, hence the slogan “Україна це Європа” (the Ukraine is Europe). What is implied here is that the Ukraine is part of the civilized “West” while Russia is some kind of “Asiatic” realm, populated by people who neither understand nor like the so-called “European values” and against whom the “civilized” Ukrainians need to stand in defense of Europe. This is just a rehashing of the old russophobic notion of the Marquis de Custine who famously said “Grattez le Russe, et vous verrez un Tartare” (scratch the Russian and you will find the Tatar). Hitler also warned about the “Asiatic” nature of the “Russian subhumans”. Paradoxically, while these Russia-haters never understood Russia, they still were unto something very real: the fact that while even though in the recent past (roughly between the 18th and 21st centuries ), Russia was ruled by pro-Western elites, most of the Russian people never surrendered to the acculturation process imposed by their rulers and while they externally complied, internally, on the level of their ethos, they kept their ancient roots.

Historically, Russia has been the product of three main factors: Russians take most of their ethnic stock from the ancient Slavic people who lived in what is today called the Ukraine, their religion and worldview from the Orthodox Christianity inherited from the Eastern Roman Empire (mistakenly called “Byzantium” in the West), and their statehood from the Tatar occupation which unified various small principalities into one unified state. True, since Peter I Russian elites (Monarchists or Communists) tried hard to “westernize” the Russian people, but since the coming to power of Putin this tendency has finally been reversed. This is why Putin enjoys a 80%+ support in poll after poll while the Russian elites hate him. The events in the Ukraine further accelerated this process: the Ukrainian pseudo “civilizational choice” did result in a real Russian civilizational choice which has too many implications for full discussion here, but one of these is the embrace of Islam as an integral part of Russia.

In itself, this acceptance of Islam as part of Russia is nothing new. Czar Nicholas II, who was an extremely pious Orthodox Christian and who has been glorified as a saint by the Russian Orthodox Church, personally chose the central location of what was then the biggest mosque in Europe – right in the middle of the then capital of Russia, Saint Petersburg. So what Putin is doing now is just in the direct continuation of what was done before him.

Still, less than 20 years after two wars in the Balkans (Bosnia, Kosovo) and two wars inside Russia (both in Chechnia) very few had predicted that Muslim Chechens would fight in defense of Orthodox Christians in the Donbass, while Putin would inaugurate the biggest mosque in Europe just a mile away from the Kremlin. The reality, of course, is that these wars did not pitch Russia against Islam, but Russia against a very specific form of Saudi-backed Wahabi Islam which, itself, was organized and controlled by the AngloZionist Empire.

Most Russians, including Putin himself, are acutely aware of the huge difference between what they call “traditional Islam” and Wahabi/Takfiri Islam and they see the latter as an instrument of the USA to destroy those countries and regimes which refuse to submit to the AngloZionist Empire.

ORDER IT NOW

In the West we mostly hear about how “Islamic terrorists” kill Christians in Syria, Yazidis in Iraq or even Hindus in India. In Russia, however, people regularly hear how Wahabi terrorists murder Muslim religious leaders and personalities (especially in southern Russia) and how the Wahabis consider all other Muslims, as infidels and idolaters. In other words, Russians don’t see an “Islamic threat”, but only a “Wahabi/Takfiri” one.

The same goes for history. While in the West we are told that the Crusades opposed “Christendom” and Islam, in Russia the Orthodox Christians fully remember that they were on the same receiving end of the Papist Crusades as the Muslims and many Russians even remember that the Pope ordered a “northern Crusade” to destroy Russian Orthodoxy. Finally, even a cursory look at the history of the Ukraine tells Russians everything they need to know about how the Papacy has always persecuted the “Photian schismatics” (Orthodox Christianity) “ad majorem Dei gloriam” (for the greater glory of God). In contrast, relations between Orthodox Christians and Muslims have by and large been peaceful. The notable exception to this was the Ottoman Empire which has always viciously persecuted Orthodox Christianity, but that kind of behavior was always an Ottoman characteristic, not a Muslim one.

As Colonel-General (3 star general) Vladislav Achalov said “Православные и Правоверные всегда договорятся!” (the Orthodox and the Faithful will always find an agreement). He is right. While on a dogmatic level Islam and Orthodoxy are fundamentally incompatible (Islam sees Christ as a man, Orthodoxy as Son of God and God Himself), on a cultural and social level there are no incompatibilities at all. In fact, the two religions share a lot of common views, especially on daily social issues. It is not a coincidence that the same city which now will host the biggest mosque in Europe also banned “gay pride” parades for the next 100 years.

The recent events in the Middle-East are also having their impact on Russia. One can often hear in the Russian media and blogosphere the idea that “the Syrians are killing Wahabis terrorists over there so we don’t have to do that over here” and most people understand that Daesh is not only a problem for the Middle-East, but also a direct threat to the Caucasus and Central Asia. Nor are Russian decision makers under any illusions about what can happen in Afghanistan. This is why they have turned the so-called “soft underbelly of Russia” into what I would call the “armored underbelly of Russia”.

Still, while Russian soldiers and special units can kill Wahabis in their thousands, no amount of military force can really eliminate Wahabism itself. Only Islam can truly defeat Wahabism. The perfect example of that reality is Chechnia were the Russian won the war, but Akhmad and Ramzan Kadyrov truly won the peace (even today, Chechen Muslims hold all the primary security functions in Chechnia, while the Federal Forces remain primarily as a reserve force). Russians have no special preference as to which branch of Islam to support against Wahabism, as long as it is a traditional one which does not pose an immediate and major threat to everybody else. In Chechnia most Muslims are Sunni, Iranians and Hezbollah are Shia while the regime in Syria is Alawi. As for the country closest to Russia – Kazakhstan – most of its people are Sunni Muslims. Russia is even exploring, albeit with difficulty, the possibilities of forging closer contacts with Turkey, even though the Ottomans used be the second worst enemy of Orthodox Christianity (after the Papacy, of course).

The contrast with the AngloZionist Empire could not be greater. While in the West most political leaders chose to deny that the West’s current conflict is one pitting the “West” against “Islam”, the western propaganda machine (Hollywood, TV, print media, etc.) is clearly demonizing Islam and Muslims in general. Furthermore, the current refugee crisis in Europe is often interpreted as an “Islamic” cultural threat to either secular or “Christian” Europe (pseudo and post Christian, in reality, of course). French racists chose to blame it all on “Islam” completely overlooking that Christian Romanians and Gypsies also could not integrate the French society either.

In the EU politicians are seriously asking whether the hijab is compatible with “western values”. For Orthodox Christians this is a no-brainer: enter into a traditional Orthodox church and you will see all the woman covering their heads with something which looks very much like a hijab. Or take a traditional Russian doll – the famous matrioshkas – and look at what Russian women used to wear for centuries before the Russian elites tried to westernize them: the very same hijab. Finally, look at any Orthodox icon showing the Mother of God and look what she is wearing and, you guessed it, you will see something very similar to a modern hijab. In fact, the rules of modesty are almost the same ones in Islam and Orthodox Christianity, as is the preference for men to have beards. What you will never see amongst Orthodox Christians are the Niqabs or Burkas, not even for monastics. But that is not a practice amongst Russian Muslims either. At this point somebody will inevitably ask about alcohol, so I might as well address that here.

Russians still like their alcohol, especially their beloved vodka, and most will be unwilling to give it up. But most Russians are also are acutely aware of the devastating effect the abuse of alcohol has had on the Russian people and society. So, if anything, as long as they are not forced to give up their own right to drink alcohol, they respect those who, like Muslims, decide not to drink it. So while this topic makes for good social conversation, it is really a non-issue since Muslims in Russia have never tried to impose a ban on alcohol on non-Muslims. Again, Tatarstan or Chechina are not Saudi Arabia (even in Grozny the sale of alcohol is strictly regulated, but it is not banned like in some US “dry counties”).

The inauguration of the new Cathedral Mosque in Moscow is a symbol of a much larger and deeper phenomenon – the slow but steady rapprochement between the Orthodox and the Islamic world, it is the expression of a Russian civilizational choice which has finally given up any illusion about being part of the “West” and which is turning south (Middle-East), east (Siberia and China) and north (Siberia and the Arctic) and, in doing so, returning to the true historical roots of what I call the “Russian civilizational realm” – those parts of the Eurasian continent which were affected and influenced by the Russian culture and people.

None of that means that Russia must necessarily be in any way hostile to the West. Of course, as long as the AngloZionists will continue to support Nazis in the Ukraine and Takfiris in the Middle-East, while constantly undermining Russia economically and threatening her militarily, relations will remain tense. But most Russian would prefer a friendly and mutually profitable relationship with the EU. The dream of a common house from the Atlantic to the Urals still has a lot of supporters in Russia. The sad reality, however, is that the Europeans seem completely unable to stand up even for their own, pragmatic, national interests. The way the EU shot itself in the foot with sanctions against Russia, or with the fantastically stupid war against Gadafi just proves to the Kremlin that the EU is just a voiceless US colony. I am sure that Russia will be willing to have friendly partnership with Europe if and when the US-designed EU and NATO are finally replaced with something more European. But until then all the Russians can do is wait and attend to the multiple risks and opportunities presented by the rest of the planet. Only time will show whether the so-called “West” can finally give up its centuries-old dream to subjugate Russia by one way or another. All Russia can do is to prepare for the worst and hope for the best while opening her capital to the Muslim world while keeping Papal visits and “gay pride” parades away.

PS: I have only superficially touched upon the complex topic of Russia and Islam. If it is of interest to you, you can check out the following series of articles:

http://thesaker.is/russia-and-islam-part-one-introduction-and-definitions/

http://thesaker.is/russia-and-islam-part-two-russian-orthodoxy/

http://thesaker.is/russia-and-islam-part-three-internal-russian-politics/

http://thesaker.is/russia-and-islam-part-four-islam-as-a-threat/

http://thesaker.is/russia-and-islam-part-five-islam-as-an-ally/

http://thesaker.is/russia-and-islam-part-six-the-kremlin/

http://thesaker.is/russia-and-islam-part-seven-the-weathermans-cop-out/

http://thesaker.is/russia-and-islam-part-eight-working-together-a-basic-how-to/

http://thesaker.is/replies-to-the-comments-posted-under-russia-and-islam-part-eight-working-together-a-basic-how-to/

 
• Category: Foreign Policy, History • Tags: Islam, Russia 

152 Comments to "Russia's "Civilizational Choice""

Commenters to Ignore
...to Follow
Endorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Mr Saker’s opinions on Catholic history are, to put it mildly, rather odd. I invite him to read the entry in the 1915 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia (which is on the internet) which discusses the great unnecessary schism of a thousand years ago.

    If he does bother to read it he will be struck by two things: it’s utter fairness to the Orthodox, and its historical accuracy (and honesty). In this entry the Orthodox positions are stated with respect, and the bad motivations of parties on both sides are examined in justice.

    But given Mr Saker’s well-known penchant for slamming the door in the faces of those who are sympathetic to him and would be his natural allies, I am somewhat doubtful he will bother to read it.

    • Replies: ,
    Reply More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. The Saker should stick to this sort of composition, he actually does a fair work of it (unlike his patently poor intelligence analysis)

    • Replies:
  3. I’m not outraged or anything, but can I ask you to expound on Romanian Christians not assimilating? Gypsies are also Romanian Christians, just not ethnic Romanians, so I get that angle. Granted, the great wave of Romanian immigration is mostly less than a decade old, and it features people who go to work in the West on the assumption that they will return, which is why they leave their children, their parents and their spouses here. The general view among Romanians is that the ones that want to stay do assimilate and the facility of their children with the language is the first thing to go, often intentionally. This is lamented as sealing the loss of working age and reproductive age people, as well as the debilitating brain drain we’re experiencing. Having just been on a flight towards Bucharest from a vacation spot, I saw Romanian parents conversing in Spanish with their children and among themselves when in front of the kids. The cultural divide (norms of behavior, attitude towards interpersonal relationships and so on) is not that great that it cannot be paved over with ease. It’s even less pronounced in the newer generations.

    • Replies:
  4. Glad others have picked up on this. The guy is always wrong. I mean, it’s kind of a joke really.

    Wasn’t his last column for Unz about why Russia would not intervene in Syria? And that was about ten days ago. :-)

    I think he and Orlov are old school Cold War propagandists stuck in the memes of thirty years or so ago.

    A few months ago The Faker was writing about white supremacism in the west: yes, the very same west where the white population decreases every single years and where the indigenous population is already a minority in many of its capitals.

    The Faker fawned all over Tsipras when he was elected.

    For the last two years he has told his readers Ukraine was about to collapse.

    Once he managed to write an article on the Mistral ships situation by starting his “analysis” saying Russia did not need that type of ships anyway, then ending it by saying that the Russians had probably managed to obtain all the blueprints for the ships and that they would build them themselves… :-)

    The guy is a fraud. Sad thing is…. people actually donate to him.

    • Agree: Wizard of Oz
    • Replies: ,
  5. Wasn’t his last column for Unz about why Russia would not intervene in Syria? And that was about ten days ago.

    It was not about “Russia interfering” , it was about Russian Armed Forces being deployed there, but, I recon, you don’t know the difference. I do not agree with Saker on many points but, please, let’s not misrepresent things. If Russian Armed Forces would have been deployed in Syria the IS combat stability would be counted in days, if not in hours. Russia would intervene, and it did, in Syria but to explain to you the difference between “deployment” of, say, 76th and 106th Airborne (to use US lingo) Divisions and several jets and about battalion of Russian advisers could be a waste of time–you will not know the difference.

    • Replies:
  6. All Russia can do is to prepare for the worst and hope for the best while opening her capital to the Muslim world while keeping Papal visits and “gay pride” parades away.

    Well, Saker, that means you never dealt with Muslims and I mean of mujaheddin variety. Russians and Islam have NOthing in common and if you have read Dostoevsky’s Diaries about Foma Danilov you would get it. Russia DOES have an issue with Islam, she always did.

  7. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"]
    says:
    • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Russia needs to focus on behavioral/ethical and scientific/innovative as well as to civilizational matters.
    In the pre-modern world, civilizational matters were very important. As things changed slowly or hardly at all, a society was defined by its civilizational ideas, images, and values. Civilizational issues were the source of power and order.

    But then, modernity came with the explosion of business, science, and individualism. Henceforth, the mega-civilizational issues and themes mattered less and less as a source of power.
    In the pre-modern era, the West hardly had more power than Orthodox Russia, Confucian China, the empire of Persia, the Muslim Ottomans, Hindu civilization, and etc. Each held onto their own domains. Little changed. They clung to their broad macro-civilizational themes as the eternal truths from which it made no sense to deviate.

    Civilizational ideas provided vision, order, and meaning to society. They rooted society in some kind of tradition, continuity, and priority.
    But because BIG THEMES dominated by traditional institutions controlled most of everything, there was little dynamism. Paradoxically, the truly big changes come from small things. It’s like Ayn Rand said it is the freedom of the individual that brings about new paradigms. Also, all great breakthroughs in science started with a small discovery that led to more and more discoveries and useful ‘accidents’. It’s like what James Burke showed in CONNECTIONS. Progress is made up of many different parts, and no one knows where one thing may lead to another. Much is ‘accidental’ and unforeseen.
    The civilizational way is to have a big mega-macro broad vision and try to fit everything into its scheme. It is premised on the notion that mankind has The Answer. The Answer is either in the scriptures or in the canon(like Confucian texts). So, everyone and everything must be made to conform to this big giant scheme. It was the Byzantine way of the Eastern Roman(Greek) empire. It was useful for social order and stability, at least for awhile. But it also led to stasis. If a society believes it has The Answer for everything, why change anything, why think new thoughts, why try to make better? Also, individuals who are ‘different’ wouldn’t be seen/valued as innovators and creators but as tinkerers of the trivial and frivolous. They would either be marginalized or suppressed, even killed — like with the Chinese guy of Ray Bradbury short story who is killed cuz he invented a flying machine than cooking up the umpeenth serving of mooshoo pork good enough for Confucius.

    [MORE]

    The civilizational way has its advantages, but it also leads to deepening corruption. Why? Because the ruling order gains a permanent-ist kind of power. Since it rules with the conviction and command that it represents timeless truth and wisdom, there is no means to challenge their power. All the grand-themes are on the side of the ruling elites and the existing social order. So, the only way other people can gain power is by conspiracy and corruption. In the end, Byzantine Order grew terribly corrupt despite its facade of order, truth, stability, and harmony. When nothing or little changes, the rulers grow complacent, dull, and static(and cynical). Since the civilization themes dominate everything, those who want change cannot challenge the order in any meaningful or fundamental way. So, they turn to corruption and intrigue to gain the power while preaching the same tripe about ‘timeless values’. And since individualism doesn’t exist — it is seen as a challenge to The Answer of eternal truth — , there aren’t opportunities whereby all the little changes eventually turn into big changes(as in James Burke’s CONNECTIONS where so many little changes eventually effect mega-change that finally leads to the rocket ship). Civilizationalists believe that they can see into the future. Since they hold the truth, they figure they have the formula for all time. But the ‘connectionists’ admit they don’t know what the future will hold. Just like scientists and inventors in the 17th century had no idea that their ideas would eventually lead to the atom bomb and internet, ‘connectionists’ figure the best way is to just allow lots of freedom, liberty, individualism, experimentation, and see what happens.

    In a way, change has a way of checking the problems of corruption. Change obviously brings forth new opportunities for corruption, but in destroying the old ways, it gets rid of old forms of corruption. It’s like man will always produce new shit, but if he has a regular bowel movement, he’s shitting out the shit before it gets old. In contrast, a man who has a very slow bowel movement makes the shit inside him to just get older and older. He may shit less than a man who shits a lot, but a shit-alotter is shitting fresh shit whereas the shit-littler is holding a lot of shit inside him, and this old shit just gets shittier. It’s like young Elvis was better than the old Elvis who began to shit less. When the King died, he had 40 lbs of doogie inside of him. He’d gone from inspiration to institution.

    Every political power, spiritual power, and economic power falls to temptation of corruption. And if the content of power remains the same over centuries or even millennia, the power grows rotten-corrupt. It’s like the US railroad company was corrupt and US auto company was corrupt. But one industry was swept aside by another one. So, they were examples of fresh corruption.
    Suppose the railroad industry were to dominate for a 1000 yrs. Suppose Microsoft or Apple could gain permanent power. Their corruption would go on for too long. It would be rotten-corruption. In contrast, if a new company takes the lead, it too will be corrupt, but it will be a new fresh kind of corruption that at least has more inspiration to it.

    Everything is somewhat corrupt, but fresh corruption is preferable to old rotten corruption. Indeed, the main value of democracy is nothing more than the fact that no political power gets to establish its form of corruption for too long.
    At least that is true in a real democracy. Problem with the US is both parties are now cucks of the Jews(and their sidekicks the homos). So, both parties are steeped in Jewish corruption that is getting ever more rotten. Prior to Jewish rise to power, ethnic corruption was partly checked by competition among Protestants, Catholics, Anglos, Irish, Germans, Jews, and etc. But once Jews got the power, they used the Holocaust Card to prohibit any criticism of Jewish power. So, Jewish Power has turned permanentalist, and that makes for a Jewish corruption that grows more and more established and entrenched as yrs go on, and that is not healthy.

    From a purely civilizational viewpoint, I would say the Catholicist and Protestantist visions/values are preferable to the Orthodox(Greek or Russian) or Islamic. Western Christianity allows more room for individual conscience, especially true of Protestantism. They stress the importance of free will. In contrast, Orthodox Religion was overly focused on the institution of power and on the unity of state and church. Though Western European nations/kingdoms had national churches too, the political forces didn’t have the kind of power over the church that the Russian rulers did over the Orthodox church. And Catholic and Protestant clergy weren’t as slavish to the state as the Russian Orthodox priesthood was. The Vatican maintained its independence from European kingdoms, and Protestants stressed the direct relationship between man and God. Now, the Russian Orthodox Church is rich in its history and tradition. It seems that way certainly in ANDREI RUBLEV and such movies. But it allowed too little in the way of individual conscience and free will.

    But today, we are not speaking of Russian Orthodox(and Islam) versus Catholicism/Protestantism but versus Holocaustianity, Homo-deism, Negro-worship(yes, the Magic Negro, such as Mandela and the loathsome MLK, along with rappers and certain athletes, are near-worshiped in the West). The Grand Civilizational Narrative of the current West is utterly ludicrous.
    If it were just a matter of civilizational thematics, I would choose Orthodoxism over Holocaustianity, Homo-deism, and Negro-jive-worship; the quasi-spiritual ‘new religions’ of the West are decadent, idiotic, and trashy. To be sure, the Holocaust was a great dark tragedy, but it is no basis for a new faith, especially as it requires people to worship Jews forever as helpless victims when they are now acting like new hitlers of the world(all the while accusing others of being the New Hitler).

    But where Russia and even China still fail is in their failure to grasp the formula of ‘connectionalism’. In pre-modern times, it was enough for a society to be civilizational since there was little change or progress even in the great advanced civilizations. It’s like Romans could conquer only so much. Persians and Byzantines could never gain total dominance over the other. Russia could take empty Siberia but didn’t push against China proper, at least not much.

    But once the West began to go into connectionalist mode and allow small changes to avalanche into big changes with all sorts of technological, economic, and individual breakthroughs, the broad themes of civilization began to matter less. In the end, it wasn’t God and Country that made UK great but all the shop keepers, inventors, businessmen/merchants, and etc. And once UK adopted all these changes, it could challenge even gigantic Russia and defeat it in the Crimea even though UK had to transport its forces far from home. And a handful of British ships could defeat China and force Chinese to suck on opium(by buying that stuff from Jews like David Sassoon).

    The fact is that US is still on connectionalist mode whereas Russia isn’t. Sure, Russia has its big machines and lots of tanks, and etc. But 21st century warfare isn’t about hardware. It’s about software, and US with its smart Jews(and best brains from the world via brain-drain to Silicon Valley) is far ahead of the game.
    And as important as morality is important to society, it can have a stifling impact in attracting the best brains and most creative people around the world. Riyadh in Saudi Arabia is very moralistic whereas San Fran is very decadent, but if you’re a smart person with ideas or creative person with vision, would you rather go to Riyadh or San Fran? Small towns and countryside are more moralistic than ‘corrupt cities’ but people with ideas, ambition, and curiosity go to cities than settle in stable/staid moral communities.
    Of course, the danger of too much freedom can lead to decadence and dissolution. While civilizational moralism can lead to stasis and stagnation — and unchecked corruption of those who invoke piety to keep the power and grab all the goodies for themselves(which is what has become of the Iranian clergy and Cuban elites who are still in power) — , rampant decadence can lead to social breakdown.
    And if there are lots of Negroes, it can lead to Detroitization. And even NY was going down, down, and down due to increasing Negro craziness, punk decadence, trashy anarchic tendencies, and etc beginning in the 60s. And homos got so out of order that they were buggering everything in sight and unleashed the AIDS panic in the 80s.

    So, the Liberal elites decided to rein in excessive freedom. They used Clinton to lock up a whole bunch of Negroes, and they pressured homos to become ‘respectable’ and aspire to be ‘middle-class’ than acting like the nutjob tooters in William Friedkin’s CRUISING.
    Freedom is important, but if you allow too much liberty, it leads to excess which leads to destruction. But if society tries to clamp down on freedom with overt moralism, the weight of civilizationalism buries the creative energies of connectionalism. American Pop music developed from connectionalism. One thing unexpectedly led to another and led to Rock music — and even British played a key role in it. When Bach was making Church Music, he was making music for all times, and he made some very great music. But such kind of classical music had broad themes that limited creative expression and possibilities. In contrast, because there was no overriding moral or spiritual theme to much of American music, bits and pieces of various musical forms could come together and crossbreed and turn into a new kind of music like that of Bob Dylan.

    Now, Russia is hardly some moralistic straitjacket society. There are tons of freedom, and you can even enjoy decadence if you want it. There are night clubs galore, and all kinds of fun stuff. You can get most of what you can get in the West. But the current theme of globalism is “a society isn’t really free unless homos are allowed to do everything as they please.” It’s a stupid idear, but it has stuck a chord in the minds of many talented people.
    Come to think of it, homomania is really a form of anti-freedom since Westerners now have to revere and cheer for the homo parade the way people in commie nations used to have to revere and cheer for The Party. But, because the West commands the world media and academia, most smart people around the world think a society isn’t free, ‘evolved’, and progressive unless it makes homos feel like the center of the universe. So, smart people, as they’ve been brainwashed by PC since cradle, think the only kind of society where they can be free is a homo-centric society. Even though Russia offers all kinds of social freedoms, smart people around the world see Russia as overly moralistic and judgmental cuz it doesn’t allow homo parades and has supported the revival of the Church. So, Russia doesn’t attract the best around the world.

    Of course, Russia has its share of smart people, but many of these are Jews, and Russian Jews would rather subvert Russia and collude with foreign Jews. Jews are Jews first and whatever else second. But surely, there are smart Russians too. Yes, but Russians are lacking in behavioral and ethical properties that make for good society. Too many Russians are lazy, haphazard, boorish, mentally clumsy, slovenly, ill-disciplined. They are too prone to jumping and dancing on tables, downing bottles and bottles of vodka, and wrestling with the nearest bear. Some Russians seem to think they are more bear than human.
    Also, when it comes to ethics, Russians tend to be play loose. If Russia had modeled its behavioralism and ethicism on Prussia, it would have become the biggest power in the world. Imagine a Prussia the size of Russia. It’d be unbeatable. But the Russian elites never took their own people seriously. They hired a lot of Germans to do things, and Germans did a really good job. But the Russian elites never thought to behaviorally and ethically Germanize the Russians. They were content to use Germans as middlemen and managers of the Russian system. It was as if the Russian elites looked down on their own people and wanted them to remain low and servile. Better to hire talented foreigners to run things than elevating lowly natives to higher levels of society and responsibility.
    Germans and Japanese trained their own people to become responsible and ethical and run the state and business. Russian state failed at this. Some of it was attempted under communism, but the Soviet Union was complicated cuz for a long while, it wasn’t even run by ethnic Russians, and it has rule over tons of non-Russians as well as Russians. Finally, after the fall of Khushchev, a kind of Russian dominance did finally dominate the USSR, but communism was bound to fail since it offers no incentive.

    In a way, communism was like the old civilizational mode of running a society. Marxism-Leninism claimed to know The Answer and The Future. After all, Marx was the great prophet who said capitalism would give way to communism eventually. And communists believed in the command economy. The state and its experts/ideologues supposedly had the right formula when it came to providing what the people needed and wanted. And to some extent, the communism did deliver as it did create dams, housing, trucks, and all sorts of machinery. But in the long run, the overt emphasis on all-knowing command economy and all-knowing social theory forbade any kind of individual initiative or creative deviance that might lead to dynamic possibilities. Under the communist system, macro-economics and mega-power was the only power. The State knew everything.
    In contrast, the connectionalist West allowed all sorts of individuals to work at micro-innovations that connected, unexpectedly as often as expectedly, with other micro-innovations that led to all sorts of new breakthroughs. And since the capitalist system produced more wealth, it also produced lots of taxes that provided more funds for the state. So, even though the public sector was a fraction of the private sector in the West, it had more to spend on the military and social welfare than the USSR where the state commanded everything.

    And this is what the Russians need to be wary of. Civilizational issues are important, but they are not sufficient in the modern world to create and bring forth the kinds of changes, innovations, and inspirations that lead to new possibilities in technology and consumption that expand wealth and tax base and make for a more powerful military.

    Imagine if one society extolled God and virtue whereas another society praised Satan and vice. Purely from a civilizational viewpoint, we should side with the former society. And if the two civilizations were pitted against one another purely on civilizational grounds, the former would likely win. Imagine if two such societies had existed in the pre-modern era, and both had the same amount of warriors and same kinds of weapons. Those with spiritual/moral consciousness will defeat those who revel in wretchedness and vileness. It’s like Moses and the virtuous Jews whup the ass of the Golden Calf worshipers in THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.

    But things are complicated in the modern world. Modern world’s power derives mainly from economics of consumption, innovation in science, new technology, and etc. And all those come from freedom, individualism, ‘greed’, feeding on vanity, egoism, material incentives, and etc.
    In the modern world, a Satanic society faces the danger of falling apart from too much wickedness. But if it is able to check its wickedness from being too excessive and harness the freedom unleashed by Satanics — devils are more encouraging of experimentation than the angels are — in constructive ways, it can bring about a lot more economic growth and technological change than a modern virtuous society of God that is averse to sinfulness of freedom lest it corrupt people. Porny Jews produce more wealth than moral Amish.

    It’s like Adam and Eve gained the knowledge of new possibilities by eating from the Tree of Knowledge, a sin against God. All new stuff comes from some kind of violation.
    Every people and every generation think they are right. They have assumptions and premises that they consider to be set in stone. So, every new idea or vision that challenges the existing norm has a ‘devilish’ and ‘sinful’ content akin to eating from the Tree of Knowledge.
    In the end, capitalist ‘greed’ produced and achieved a lot more than communist ‘virtue’. And ‘greedy’ China under market economy achieved a lot more than Maoist China with its big emphasis on equality and ideological purity.
    And come to think of it, the filthy and decadent Cuba under Batista was more dynamic and open to change than ‘virtuous’ Cuba under Castro the would-be Marxist. Besides, even though there was lots of corruption in Batista’s Cuba, the nature of corruption was changing all the time since new industries and businesses and companies kept gaining over previous ones. In contrast, the corruption of the Castro regime is now over 50 yrs old and turning near-Byzantine. Same can be said of North Korea that preaches virtue but maintains the continuity of dried doogie rotten-corruption. If corruption is a part of life, having new faces of corruption is better than having the same old face of corruption forever and ever and ever. As bad as US politics is, imagine a nation where someone like Bush II or Obama rules for 50 yrs than 4 or 8.

    Putin has some good ideas for Russia, and he is better than the oligarchs because he has a national vision that goes beyond mere personal vanity. Most oligarchs around the world are either only for personal vanity or for cucking for the Jews, the only people who are approved for having a proud national/tribal sense.
    But Russia cannot rely on Putin alone beause Putin cannot live forever. And even if Putin were a saint — which he certainly is not — , if he maintains his power for too long, then a kind of Byzantine dried-doogie kind of corruption will grow crusty within the Russian government, like what happened under communism when Kremlin just became one big dried doogie that kept growing older and ever more constipated. When the old ones were dying in 70s and 80s, the Kremlin itself looked like a Mausoleum or the large intestine of Elvis Presley sitting on the toilet when he croaked.

    Putin is good to block the homo agenda which is really a neo-imperialist proxy of the Jews who are using it to subvert and degrade every gentile nation to butter it up for Jewish supremacist sodomy. And he is right to allow some degree of moral/spiritual revival in Russia. But he must also check the power of the church and ensure that Russia remain a place for individualism, initiative, and rule of law. Indeed, that is what Putin needs to focus on. He must prussianize Russia and make Russians more orderly, disciplined, and self-controlled. He must target behavior and ethics. No matter how much Russia preaches morality and spirituality, it will rot if, in reality, too many Russians are into drinking, fighting, shoddy workmanship, violating rules, and driving like they do in youtube videos. The West may not be virtuous, but it still has more rule-of-law when it comes to property rights and meritocracy than Russia does.

    It’s good for Russians to preach some morality, but no less important is the need to practice responsibility in government, business, education, and etc. After all, talk is cheap. Negroes in America preach morality all the time but they rob and steal and act like Negroes that they are. And Latin America has been preaching Catholic/Marxist piety about ‘equality’ and etc to ‘greedy gringo’ forever, but they’ve run societies steeped in corruption, deceit, laziness, gangsterism, and the kind of stuff you see in SALVADOR and SCARFACE.

    Putin must take a hard look at the practice of Russianness among Russians. In the end, his success and failure will depend on whether he can mold Russians to be moral people who are responsible in life. One thing for sure, he has failed in relying too much on oil and natural resources for Russian recovery. When the oil prices were high, he seemed to be doing well. But now, it’s crunch time with the fall in oil and with the sanctions from EU. Of course, this pressure from the West can be a boon to Russia if Russians work hard to build up domestic industries instead of relying so heavily on other nations for technology. If Germans and Japanese could do it, why not Russians? Genetically, Russians are nearly just as good as Germans or Japanese. But culturally, too many Russians are still too much like ‘white trash’. They’d rather hit the vodka than the books. They think it’s no big deal to cheat, steal, cut corners, and take things for granted. Consider how a stupid screw messed up the submarine in K-19 by Kathryn Bigelow.

    Also, Russia needs to harness and expand on the smarts of smart Russians. US gained a tremendous deal by letting Jews run around and do as they please. As Jews are smart, this freedom allowed Jews to come up with all sorts of innovation in retail, technology, science, medicine, media, and etc. But then, white gentiles lost the US to Jews(and homos). Also, Jews took hold of the Narrative and destroyed the souls of white people with the cult of ‘white guilt’. White people in the West have no pride except in working for their own demise. White Americans think nothing is more virtuous than cucking for Jews and Negroes, and European think the highest European virtue is surrendering Europe to Africans and Arabs as the ‘new Europeans’.

    It’s a great thing that Russians still have pride in being Russian. But in order to maintain this, Russians had to restrain the power and freedom of Jews. As a result, Jews in Russia don’t try as hard as in the West.
    Russians still have Russia, but the Jewish creative/productive/inventive potential has been checked in Russia.
    White American gained much from full flowering of Jewish potential in America, but white Americans have lost their country.

    Russians must seek to keep their country AND bring forth great innovation/growth.
    And how could this be done? Behaviorally and ethically, Russians must seek to Prussianize Russia. One way to do this is to create an activist wing of the Orthodox Church. The great advantage of Protestantism is it produced many hardworking independent-minded missionaries and social reformers who went to the people and worked with them and through them. The problem of Russian Orthodox church was that the clergy either stayed within the walls of church or remained too close to the state.
    The missionary zeal of Protestants to convert the heathen around the world was a reflection of their zeal in their homeland to make things better. The lack of such missionary zeal among Russian church folks reflects the lack of such dynamism within Russia itself.
    What Russian church must do is to create army of orthodox personnel who are not merely into ritualism and such but into going into the communities all across Russia and actively engaging with people with problems. The Russian church mustn’t merely be ritualistic or aloof. It must be active and engaged. A certain wing of Orthodox church must be protestantized in method.

    And even if Putin relies on the corrupt oligarchs, he should use the power of state to at least clean up middle and lower levels of government and create an educational system that raise Russians to be clean and hardworking in behavior.

    As for IQ issues, Russia needs more smart people. If Jews were loyal, Russians could rely on them, but too many Russian Jews are like the counterparts of Victoria Nuland.
    So, Russia needs more Russians who are smart. How is this achieved? This is where civilizational moralism works against Russia. What Russia needs is for very smart men to hump and have kids with lots of women. Putin should get Russian men with IQ of 130 or higher to hump 1000 women each, and then raise the smart kids for special duty to the country in science, technology, and the like.

    Also, one area where Russia could be freer than the West is in the anti-PC department, and to an extent, the appeal of RT news is it is willing to venture into topics pretty much censored in the West. The West is still free in many areas, but PC has killed thought, arts, culture, and discussion in so many sectors of the West. It has become a kind of orthodoxy in the West. And look at all the talk of Israel, Israel, and Israel in the US elections. It’s as if Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban are the Czars of the US and as if AIPAC is the real church of America. PC is one force that prevents dynamic connectionalism in the US. So much that needs to be said and explored go unsaid and unexplored because of fear of PC controlled by Jews and homos.

    Russia should at least try to gain the cachet of being more free by attacking Western PC.

    • Replies:
  8. [For the last two years he has told his readers Ukraine was about to collapse.]

    If this ain’t collapse, it’ll do till collapse shows up))

  9. Europe’s largest mosque is Grand Mosque of Paris opened for prayers in 1926. It has the capacity for over 30,000 worshippers as compared to Moscow mosque which can accommodate only 10,000 worshippers.

    French historian Gustave Le Bon in his book, The Civilization of the Arabs, admitted the huge influence of Muslim civilization which, for him, civilized the barbarian peoples who destroyed the Roman Empire and opened for Europe the world of scientific, literary, and philosophical knowledge of which it was ignorant. In a word, for Le Bon it was the Muslims who civilized Europe.

    Moscow Grand Mosque also known as Cathedral Mosque and Jum’ah Mosque was originally built in 1905, but was closed for renovation and expansion four years ago. Turkey’s Religious Affairs Ministry provided the interior design of the 204,500 square feet renovated mosque.

    Moscow with 1.5 million Muslim population, has only four proper mosques, which makes very difficult for Muslim communities to hold large gatherings especially on Fridays and two Eids. Compared to Moscow, Toronto, my home city, is home to nearly half of Canada’s one million Muslims population. The city is adorned by a dozen beautiful mosques. The very first city mosque, Jaffari Shia Mosque, was designed by a Jewish woman architect from Bosnia.

    http://rehmat1.com/2015/09/22/moscows-central-mosque-reopens-on-eid/

    • Replies: ,
  10. “It was not about “Russia interfering” , it was about Russian Armed Forces being deployed there, but, I recon, you don’t know the difference.”

    So…Russian forces deploying to Syria will probably interfere with U.S./Europeon operations going on there. Same difference. Though from your post you apparently draw a degree of separation here, but didn’t exactly explain what the difference is.

    • Replies: ,
  11. but didn’t exactly explain what the difference is.

    Size and force structure, for starters.

  12. says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    While in the West we are told that the Crusades opposed “Christendom” and Islam, in Russia the Orthodox Christians fully remember that they were on the same receiving end of the Papist Crusades as the Muslims and many Russians even remember that the Pope ordered a “northern Crusade” to destroy Russian Orthodoxy.

    Another filthy Eastern guilt-tripper that nags, whines and cries about Crusades and blah-blah-blah while conveniently and, I must say, deliberately forgetting the massacre of Westerners in the Byzantine shithole.

    • Replies: , ,
  13. Was there ever a time when man didn’t kill man for ridiculous identitarian reasons?

    I mean seriously, just one day without a drop of blood shed because the other guy looked different than you, spoke a different language, worshiped a different god?

    • Replies:
  14. … Russia against a very specific form of Saudi-backed Wahabi Islam which, itself, was organized and controlled by the AngloZionist Empire.

    LOL. If the Wahabis are under AngloZionist control, you’d think we could at least keep ‘em from flying planes into office buildings at the empire’s headquarters … and generally ‘effing up the joint.

    A more reasonable explanation for Wahabi money might be the obvious one–the internal politics of Saudi Arabia and specifically the deal the Sauds have done to keep legitimacy and the oil based loot that goes with it. (Inc. the reaction to the Mahdist takeover of the Grand Mosque in 1979.)

    Believe it or not local politics exists–and would continue to exist–even if the West and Jews did not exist. It’s the nature of man.

    • Replies:
  15. It’s a *bad* “civilivational choice”.

    Putin doesn’t seem like an idiot to me, but nonetheless he still has the “we’ll handle it” cluelessness of his western counterparts. Sorry, you guys don’t “handle” anything. A nation–a healthy nation of a particular people and culture–”handle it”. Putin’s making a world historical bad choice for Russia.

    Seems pretty obvious to me, that while much of his “keep a stiff prick” policy is in the interest of Russians, what he really should be doing is not all this nattering imperial ambition at the Russian fringes, but work for a slightly smaller but much healthier\sustainable *Russian* Russia.

    Why do you actually *want* a million plus muslims in your capital? Uh … you don’t!

    The Chechens are aholes. Why do you want them in?–and then causing problems in your capital? You don’t. Cut them and the other obstreperous moslem tribes lose. Purge the other muslim districts. Then more or less ban Islam. Don’t let ‘em in. Restrict, ban, purge, harass. Make it explicit that Russia already has a particular civilizational culture. And it’s Orthodox, not Islam.

    Russia isn’t hurting for resources or real estate. Almost twice the next biggest folks. Cultivate a coherent national culture and the Russian girls can–and will want to–fill that territory with their wombs.

    Chose “civilizational diversity” and you’ll be putting up with Islamic aholes and their passive aggressive–or just plain aggressive–crap, for … ever. A generation and Russia will be in the mess India is in now.

    Be like Japan instead. Be big by being small–tight and coherent. And you’ll still have a nation 1000 years down the road.

    • Replies: ,
  16. probably there was no such day after the neolithic revolution. I sometimes think that since than humankind just took a wrong path.

    • Replies: ,
  17. it is maybe not Islam in principle which is the problem. But still in the last 30 years Islam has been the problem, and it continues to be so. The russian (eurasian) dream of a partnership of Islam and orthodox christianity is nothing more than a dream. Everywhere in the world people think they can cooperate with Islam. In China they try it with enforced patriotism and anti-western nationalism which shall unite all people of China, not only the Han as well as with economic growth. In India they try it with by confirming the democratic and tolerant nature of post-independent India. In the West they try it by total submission. In Africa they try it is economic development. Yet it does not work anywhere. In countries with muslim majority life has become more and more harsh in recent decades in recent decades and the share of the minority populations shrinks. In countries with a muslim minority their share the population rises, in many such countries their is muslim terrorism and the muslim population gains more and more political power.
    It is take everything and give nothing back.
    This behavioural pattern is so attractive that it is seems to be irresistible for muslims around the world. Probably has to do something with the “strong horse” theory of Bin Laden which Anatoly Karlin recently pointed at. Everybody wants to be with winner.
    No cooperation with Islam will not work out in Russia, as it does not anywhere else.
    Apart from that Russia is an European country with colonies in Asia. It´s civilization is not nearer to the arabic world than western european countries

  18. I’m sorry to see that most of the comments on this article contrast so poorly with the article itself. The Saker’s writing is fair, humane, and tolerant. Whereas many of the comments seem to emanate from sadly biased and one-sided opinions, whether religious, cultural, or even military.

    Come on, people. We can all learn something from The Saker. And, if you only come to bitch and launch bigoted tirades, why do you even read this blog?

    • Replies: , ,
  19. French racists chose to blame it all on “Islam” completely overlooking that Christian Romanians and Gypsies also could not integrate the French society either.

    Something’s not quite right here. If some French see the problem as Islam, they’re clearly not racists, since Islam isn’t a race. On the other hand, if non-French Christians aren’t integrating into French society, then obviously the problem is race, rather then religion, so maybe the French should be racist instead of anti-Islam?

  20. Romanians yet have to abstain from their Roman legacy claims and recognize Moscow as the Third Rome and seat of Christendom. Romanians have to confess for their criminal Valachian marauding bands supporting Charles XII and Turks, their treason during Russian Liberation of Bulgaria from Osman yoke, and for their Nazi-suppoting atrocities and Holocaust-like crimes during WW2.

    • Replies: ,
  21. At the era you mention, the West was a poor uncultured shithole, not the Constantinople. The greatest Christian city was sacked by primitive Western knights – sociopaths and glorified criminals, living by robbery, ransoms, slave trade etc. Princess Anna Comnena even desribes Western Catholic bishop swearing and shooting the arbalest himself. What Westerners were ‘massacred’ – the usurers, genovese and venetian bankers, that means simply the loan sharks, racketeers and thugs. Such Catholic guests were from time to time banned from France and other states for their sociopathic misdeeds.

  22. { it was the Muslims who civilized Europe}

    What a crock.
    Name me one Muslim majority country in the world today that comes close to what Western countries are. Name one that is as orderly, advanced as many Asian (non-Muslim) countries are, e.g. Japan, South Korea.

    { Turkey’s Religious Affairs Ministry provided the interior design of the 204,500 square feet renovated mosque.}

    How lovely.
    Turks, who invaded Asia Minor from their homelands in Uyguristan, destroyed 1000s of magnificent Armenian, Assyrian, and Greek Churches.
    The magnificent Hagia Sophia church has been desecrated by Turks.

    It’s also very lovely there are many mosques in Toronto.
    Can you tell us how many churches there are in Riyadh ?
    And is the reason Islam allegedly civilized Europe that you, a Muslim, are living and thriving in Christian Canada ?

    • Replies:
  23. Well, the question was regarding assimilation, not historical power plays. We did orchestrate a shift from the Cyrillic alphabet to the Latin one in the XIXth century, so that would be an argument in favor of willingness and capability to assimilate more to Western norms?

    As for the history, it’s all written down and argued. I see no taint of blood guilt that I have to bear. Romania, like its neighbors, has always had to deal with a curse of geography. Deciding which of the great empires of the day to support for better advancing the national interests or simply surviving has always been at the heart of many political and cultural battles. Like in many countries, politicians saw the best chances in supporting the country where they were educated (either Central European or the West) and there was also a running battle between leftist and rightist movements, communists and fascists etc. Funny you should mention Romania in the Second World War. Just recently (sept 21st) was the little remembered anniversary of the assassination of Prime Minister Armand Călinescu (a francophile by orientation, but aiming for neutrality in his disposition towards the brewing WW2) by the Legionaries who a short while later would inaugurate the National Legionary State. Of course, he himself made use of bloody repression against Legionaries (including killing Codreanu) and supported the single party state instituted by the King Charles II. It’s a bloody history that I’d rather had not happened, but there it is.

    And what has Charles the XIIth have to do with us? His march on Moscow was on the Northern European plain, through today’s Poland, as all marches on Moscow in history have been. The whole war up until and including Poltava was light years away from any reasonable Romanian influence, which could not even be qualified as Romanian, since all constituent parts of today’s Romania were under the suzerainty or sovereignty of foreign empires.

    The Roman legacy claims are ethnic, not religious. The Romanians are proudly Orthodox and have an autocephalous Orthodox Church with a Patriarch. When the Patriarch of Moscow and that of Constantinople finally decide who gets to be first among equals, then we’ll know in what order to do the seating and parking spots for the various meetings and who to serve with champagne first. Otherwise, it’s irrelevant. Patriarchs are not Popes elsewhere other than their territories, so seats of Christendom are irrelevant for anything other than mood affiliations.

  24. says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    It is an r/K situation

    The west and many Asian cultures are K societies with low birthrates and high quality progressing countries. Islamic cultures are r societies that have very high reproduction and low quality regressing countries. Over time this has varied some, but the bottom line is that in the Islamic areas now, the birthrates are sky high among the lowest ability people in their societies. That makes them dumber, more violent and less progressive by the day. That is the problem with Islam right now. If it was different in the past, okay, fine. But that is what it is now.

    The author notes that the US is greatly at fault for violently stirring the pot in Iraq especially. They had an overlord keeping them in check. Sadamm gave us the finger, but didn’t attack us. He was best left alone. Same for Qdaffy and Mubarak and Assad. They aren’t nice guys, but a nice guy ruler is not an option in those places.

    Bottom line, we need to send birth control only to those places. No other kind of aid should be offered. They need a one child policy, like yesterday. They are not productive nor resourceful. They can’t even take care of themselves. As immigrants, they don’t even make good helots.

    As another commenter pointed out, Japan is the model to follow.

  25. You are probably referring to this entry?

    http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Eastern_Schism

    It’s a good read.

    An you are right, the Saker is clearly prejudiced against Catholicism. Other than that his article is all right.

    • Replies:
  26. Turks are not from Uyguristan. Turks are local converts and language shifters. If we were from Uyguristan, we would look like Uygurs, which we don’t, we look like local anatolians, and genetic tests confirm the same.

    I’m not excusing anything the ottoman empire or the turkish state have done, just dispelling some frequently mentioned bullshit.

    • Replies: , ,
  27. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factory"]
    says:
    • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    ‘Islamophobia’ should be called ‘Judeomania’.

    Servility to Jews is the source of anti-Muslim hatred, at least in the US.

  28. While on a dogmatic level Islam and Orthodoxy are fundamentally incompatible (Islam sees Christ as a man, Orthodoxy as Son of God and God Himself), on a cultural and social level there are no incompatibilities at all.

    NO.

    The difference between Islam and Christianity is that Jesus turned away from political power, both at the beginning of his ministry (after the 40 days in the wilderness) and at the end when he said “My kingdom is not of this world,” while Mohamed took political power in Medina, changed his message, and became a conqueror.

    Failure to understand that difference is failure to understand everything. Many, including Popes, have attempted to take political power in Jesus’ name, but they eventually run aground on the reality that he eschewed it. Seeking political power in Mohamed’s name as the Wahabis do is to follow in his path.

    Jesus and Mohamed are diametrically opposite.

    • Replies: ,
  29. Servility to Jews is the source of anti-Muslim hatred, at least in the US.

    Yeah, I don’t think people in the US hate Muslims. But like anyone, we hate being attacked. I am the first to say that we should not get involved in those places. We should not invade or any of the rest of it. We should leave them to their own devices, but I am fine with sending them birth control. The fact is there are very violent wacko factions, and the more normal muslims are not up to the challenge of eradicating or neutralizing the wackos. So, that means that the bazillion increase in their population thanks to the west giving them food and medicine are now haplessly wandering out of their countries. They are clueless at best and violent at worst. Americans, just like Europeans, just want muslims to stay in their own country and not bring their dysfunction and violence here. America has so far gotten more educated and educable ones, but the more that come, the more will be low performing.

  30. right, but none of that would matter if the people were not violent Arabs with very high birthrates who want to come in and get your stuff. If the muslims had a birthrate like the Chinese and just wanted to be productive people in their own countries there would be no problem. But they are not productive and they want to come to our countries and take over. No thank you. We have our own countries and we want to keep them our way.

    • Replies:
  31. probably there was no such day after the neolithic revolution. I sometimes think that since than humankind just took a wrong path.

    There was no such day *before* the neolithic revolution. Hunter-gatherer culture is tremendously violent. And most of that violence is tribe v. tribe.

    Neolithic culture undoubtedly cut daily violence, but led to larger states–violence at scale.

    I sometimes contemplate the “wrong path” question … especially when i see these girls walking down the streets with their cell phones, or–just back from Europe–watching these people walking around with sticks so they can take selfies everywhere. But realistically … this is the only *interesting* path–allowing us to do science and learn about the world. The other path was shitting in the woods for eternity.

    • Replies:
  32. You say that like that’s a bad thing. Jesus was a pushover loser. At least he could have fought the Roman’s and encouraged armed resistance, but he betrayed his people (the Jews).

    • Replies:
  33. The point is that if Muslims “just wanted to be productive people in their own countries” they wouldn’t be Muslims.

    There have been many books and articles written on the subject with many valid points about all the various details and finer points, but the difference at the core is the claim to political power. Because Mohamed made that claim, Islam changed from a religion of submission to God to a religion of submission to Islam.

    • Replies:
  34. Why?

    You can still be productive and be a macho warrior asshole. The two are not exclusive. Just look at the Klingons in Star Wars, a warrior people, yet they have a huge powerful empire capable of building economically desired starships/weapons of war.

    Is this not a good direction to go to?

    I would desire to take my country (Turkey) in this direction. To change the population by selective breeding – increase IQ, increase psychopathy, increase fearlessness and aggressiveness. In the end who will be able to stand against such a force? Nobody.

    Thank Allah I discovered HBD, now I will study the writings of Ronald Fisher on population genetics/inheritance/heritability. These will help me understand how best to select for these traits.

    • Replies: , , ,
  35. Further to “Another Dad’s” reply I would recommend War Before Civilization by Lawrence Keely.

    http://www.amazon.com/War-Before-Civilization-Peaceful-Savage/dp/0195119126

    A minor quibble being that I believe the evidence shows it was agriculture, not the neolithic, that led to states and war.

    An interesting detail is that the average health of humans declined with the advent of agriculture (as revealed in the skeletal remains). Settled life offered more stable but poorer quality food and at least some periods of protection from outright attack for the weaker.

    It seems as though men have always lived in interesting times.

  36. *Star Trek

  37. Perhaps English is not your first language and that led to misunderstanding. Jenny’s “just wanted…” means that if that were the only thing (according to customary usage). While, as you observe, “The two are not exclusive” in the wider sense, that was not her point as I understood it.

    As far as who Jesus was, it has been observed that the fact that the sources of the Bible are so varied that it creates a situation where each man’s profession of faith is a revelation of his own heart according to the parts he selects to emphasize.

  38. says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    Like it or not, Islam is as much native to Russian territory as Orthodoxy. Tatarstan – one of the most prosperous regions in Russia – proves you dead wrong on the idea that Islam and Christianity cannot co-exist in peace. No one with a shred of intelligence would think banning Islam in a nation with tens of millions of Muslims is anything but a but a boneheaded idea.

    The key to defeating radical Islam is simple: economic opportunities, education, and most important of all, cultural integration. If you can get them to drink with you and eat a pork roast once in a while you’ve already won. I can attest to this as someone who lives in a western city with a large Muslim population and can see the huge distinction between the Muslim who keeps to his own, and the Muslim who goes to university with westerners and adopts our ways.

    As for Japan, they’re dying a slow, agonizing death. Their economy and demographics are both in long-term decline and their society and culture are in decay. In 100 years they won’t be able to defend themselves against the invading Muslim hordes from North Africa, much less in 1000 years, at which point Japanese culture will be a relic of history.

    • Replies:
  39. I agree that it was the interesting path, because of science and high culture. Also it is nice to have a life expectancy of over 80 years

  40. Yes, it was the Fortescue piece.

    I, too, admire Saker’s work, which is very helpful in understanding many things. A pity he peppers it with his misunderstandings on religious matters.

  41. “In the EU politicians are seriously asking whether the hijab is compatible with “western values”. For Orthodox Christians this is a no-brainer: enter into a traditional Orthodox church and you will see all the woman covering their heads with something which looks very much like a hijab.”

    Three observations:

    1. The Russian Orthodox Church is not synonymous with Orthodox Christianity. That fact makes the second sentence false. Enter most Serbian or Greek Orthdox churches and you’ll not see a single hair covering, unless you go to a small village church, where cultural conservatism remains more entrenched than in urban areas.

    2. Up until 35 years or so, the wearing of veils used to be obligatory in the Catholic Church, too — again, in more culturally conservative areas, it’s still not uncommon to see women wear lace hair-covering during mass.

    3. There’s a key difference between traditional apparel confined to church solemnities (deriving ultimately from Jewish customs of soe 2,000 years ago) and the freedom to wear whatever clothes one wishes in everyday, secular life.

    Unlike Christianity, which has the separation of church and state endorsed by its founder, Islam is by its fery nature theocratic. For Russia to embrace the Islamic civilization, as this article claims the opening of a mosque in Moscow signifies, would be to repudiate its own civilization and the world of modernity. I very much doubt any significant number of Rusians want that.

  42. On the contrary. Had they heeded his warning, they wouldn’t have fallen for the rabble rousers who eventualy encited them to a foredoomed rebellion against an imperial power at the height f its strength and arrogance. Not only would that have spared the lives of more than half a million Jews the Romans butchered — it would also have spared Jews 2,000 years of exile, mistreatment, and attempted annihilation.

    • Replies:
  43. I now see what people mean by the term Islamo-fascist. Most Muslims, thankfully, don’t venerate Nazi ideology as you do.

  44. There’s nothing wrong with “interfering” with an illegal foreign intervention. The US and its puppets are currently violating international law by presuming to carry out military operations in Syria without the express permission of that country itself. That their activities have nothing to do with combatting IS is obvious: 62 countries led by the world’s greatest military power are incapable of destroying a force of a few tens of thousands? Not credible. In the least, that is.

  45. I don’t think the Catholic Encyclopedia is an unbiased, objective source on the matter of what it tendentiously calls the Eastern Schism. To suggest otherwise is either naive or disingenuous.

    • Replies:
  46. From the source you linked to:

    The predominance of the Italian merchants caused economic and social upheaval in Byzantium: it accelerated the decline of the independent native merchants in favour of big exporters, who became tied to the landed aristocracy, who in turn increasingly amassed large estates.[1] Together with the perceived arrogance of the Italians, it fueled popular resentment amongst the middle and lower classes both in the countryside and in the cities.[1]

    The religious differences between the two sides, who viewed each other as schismatics, further exacerbated the problem. The Italians proved uncontrollable by imperial authority: in 1162, for instance, the Pisans together with a few Venetians raided the Genoese quarter in Constantinople, causing much damage.[1] Emperor Manuel subsequently expelled most of the Genoese and Pisans from the city, thus giving the Venetians a free hand for several years.[7]

    In early 1171, however, when the Venetians attacked and largely destroyed the Genoese quarter in Constantinople, the Emperor retaliated by ordering the mass arrest of all Venetians throughout the Empire and the confiscation of their property.[1]

    Things seem to have been quite a bit more complicated than your comment implies.

  47. French historian Gustave Le Bon in his book, The Civilization of the Arabs, admitted the huge influence of Muslim civilization which, for him, civilized the barbarian peoples who destroyed the Roman Empire and opened for Europe the world of scientific, literary, and philosophical knowledge of which it was ignorant. In a word, for Le Bon it was the Muslims who civilized Europe.

    Well, if your brief description does him any justice, I doubt I’ll bother ever reading Gustave Le Bon. The only people Islam ever civilized were the Arabs themselves, transforming these desert nomads and raiders into the masters of a reasonably advanced and stable civilization. The other peoples of the near east had already been civilized for thousands of years. And if the “barbarian peoples who destroyed the Roman Empire” you’re referring to are the Celts, Germans, etc., well they had already been civilized by the Romans, which is one reason why the Arab invaders never made past the Pyrenees.

    I’m not denying that during their golden the Arabs were capable of some very competent philosophical, mathematical, and scientific inquiry–and some of this did filter into the west. But the west had other sources of inspiration as well, principally Byzantium (where the learning of the ancient Greeks had been better preserved than in the west). And some of our early scholastic philosophers were very much indigenous: Duns Scotus, Peter Abelard, Thomas Aquinas, etc.

  48. Putin’s making a world historical bad choice for Russia.

    That world historical choice was made centuries ago by the Czars, who expanded their domain into central Asia, the Caspian basin, the Caucasus, and Ukraine in order to counter or weaken their mortal enemies, the Turks and the Persians. There’s nothing Putin can do about all that now, except try and make the best of a (sometimes) difficult situation.

    By the way, the Russian nationalists who say he should just give up all that territory and walk away are fools. Any country or territory that the Russians walk away from will just be scooped by somebody else–probably NATO–and used to attack or weaken Russia. That’s why the Czars conquered it in the first place: for security, as a buffer against invasion.

    Be like Japan instead.

    Maybe you’re unaware of this, but Japan–unlike Russia–is an island.

  49. LOL. If the Wahabis are under AngloZionist control, you’d think we could at least keep ‘em from flying planes into office buildings at the empire’s headquarters … and generally ‘effing up the joint.

    And if we weren’t under AngloZionist control, what are the odds that Building 7 would have just collapsed in on itself in neat, controled-demolition style, without ever being hit by a plane?

    Wake up. 9/11 was a false flag. The 19 hijackers were just dupes used to justify a pre-existing strategy to invade the middle east.

    • Replies:
  50. Turks are not from Uyguristan. Turks are local converts and language shifters. If we were from Uyguristan, we would look like Uygurs, which we don’t, we look like local anatolians, and genetic tests confirm the same.

    I know what you mean, Kamran. But it’s true that the original Turks were from central Asia. When they conquered the middle east, they then mixed with Arabs and Greeks, which is why so many modern Turks look white or semitic. But there are still some around–like the German soccer player Özil–who actually do look rather Asiatic, with the slanted eyes and all.

  51. says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    The mosque project was a tear down and rebuild. The original mosque was built in 1904. The “new” mosque was built on the same foot print using the stones from the old mosque.

    Some people just love making trouble.

  52. You can still be productive and be a macho warrior asshole. The two are not exclusive. Just look at the Klingons in Star Wars, a warrior people, yet they have a huge powerful empire capable of building economically desired starships/weapons of war.

    Uh, Klingons are fiction. They don’t actually exist.

    Now, there could be a real example. Maybe you would like to give an example of an Arab country of macho warrior assholes that are also productive.

  53. I am not much of a conspiracy sort.

    Still, I would be curious to know if there are any particularly interesting people who just happened to be at the WTC that day who usually would not be.

    • Replies:
  54. Well, I can think of one. BBC’s Jane Standley was on hand in NY reporting live, and somehow managed to report the collapse of building seven about 20 minutes before it happened. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s)

    Additionally, I know of at least one person who usually went to the WTC almost everyday, who on 9/11 was uncharacteristically not present: namely, the owner of the WTC complex, Larry Silverstein, who had purchased the complex a mere two months prior to the attack (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Silverstein#September_11_attacks). Silverstein is an ardent Zionist who once served as NY State Chairman of the Unite Jewish Appeal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Silverstein#Philanthropy ). For this reason, and also on account of the wars in the middle east that followed, I suspect Mossad involvement.

    • Replies:
  55. It’s no BS.
    Turks are from Uyguristan.
    Turks are not local to Asia Minor.
    There is no such thing as “Anatolian”: there are Armenians, Assyrians, Kurds, Pontic Greeks,…
    No such thing as “Anatolian”.
    Denialist Turks came up with the idea to obscure the fact that they are from Central and East Asia, and to obscure the fact they wiped out the indigenous populations of Asia Minor and took their creations and culture as their own.
    To create the fiction that they are one of the mythical “Anatolian” peoples.
    Exactly what you are trying to do.

    And I know all about the genetic tests that allegedly confirm the same.
    All those tests show is what is already known: over centuries invading nomadic Turks abducted the local young women and girls and forcibly exchanged genes (rape). No surprise that Uyguroğlu Turks have some common genes with the indigenous peoples of the region.
    But Turks are still Uyguroğlu. Looks or not.
    An unwelcome foreign presence in our lands.

    And your former FM knows where the Turks are from:

    [Ahmet Davutoglu, who has become the first Turkish foreign minister ever to visit Uighur Autonomous Region in China, toured historical sites in Kashgar city. Davutoglu and an accompanying Turkish delegation arrived early Thursday in Kashgar in the extreme west of China and the extreme southwest of Uighur region. Davutoglu first visited the tomb of Mahmud Kashgari and then they toured the tomb of Yusuf Has Hajib as well the 500-year-old Id Khah Mosque, the largest mosque in China. "We are visiting the land of our ancestors," Davutoglu said.] (October 2010)

    “We are visiting the land of our ancestors”
    OK ?

    • Replies:
  56. Some excerpts from an article by Ms. BELGİN AKALTAN, the editor of HDN.
    She is a Turk.
    Hurriyet Daily News is a Turkish, mildly nationalist, news site.

    The article link is below.

    { Our genes must have gone through mutations while we were traveling on horseback from Central Asia to Anatolia. It’s a long ride. Something must have gone wrong along the way. I think we are mutant Turks. Like Ninja turtles. We are like a lab accident.
    First of all – sorry for the repetition – we carry the “killer DNA” in our souls. It may have been a remarkable, wonderful and praiseworthy feature to be able to kill, to kill as many people as possible in the battlefield once upon a time when everything depended on winning wars and conquering. When the whole system was based on occupation, physical power, a strong army; of course, killing meant winning. }

    “Our genes must have gone through mutations while we were traveling on horseback from Central Asia to Anatolia. ”
    “…traveling on horseback from Central Asia to Anatolia.”
    OK ?

    { We have persistently reserved that killer gene for centuries. Even though we do not conquer and fight in the battlefield anymore, we have the mutant killer gene and its sub-gene that protects the murderer. We have special respect and a secret love for the murderer. }

    “We have special respect and a secret love for the murderer”

    { This killer gene and its side product – protecting the killer gene – contribute to the miserable human factor in Turkey. Everything, every profession, every person is affected by it. We are third-class in everything. }

    You are not, quote, “Anatolian”.
    Despite the change in your appearance, you (plural you) are still Uyguroğlar.
    Your fellow Turk Ms. AKALTAN knows you are.
    —-

    http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/we-have-corrupt-dna.aspx?PageID=238&NID=66875&NewsCatID=469

  57. Yes we can learn something from the Saker, and I was about to acknowledge that he probably knows more about Russia-Islam relations than any commenter and express gratitude for being introduced to that theme. But there is little to be learned from him across the vast terrain he trespasses on with no real claim to special knowledge or careful research. Moreover his nuttiness – quite up to truther standards – which has him asserting with no glimpse of evidence that the “Anglo-Zionists” are behind Wahabi generated Islamic barbarism in the ME casts doubt on everything he writes.

    • Replies:
  58. Apologies for my first impression:) At #8 you have produced an essay well worth reading. But I still don’t get your thing about Jews and homosexuals jointly or severally. Maybe if I could work out where your pseudonym comes from I would understand better???

    As I have written elsewhere I think, despite the gloomy words of Moses Hess and others about German (Christian Europe’s??) anti-Semitism, the pre-WW1 world was shaping up to be one in which assimilated Jews – often marrying out – were the best kind of educated ladies and gentlemen of their respective countries. Now, I hypothesised, Israel is the problem – despite my support for it – because it requires such a distortion of American policy whatever one thinks about its effect on the ME.

    But a basic holding back on criticism of Israel by Jews generally isn’t the problem you seem to be concerned with. That surely is about Sheldon Adelson, AIPAC and the like. But that is only a long term problem if what it shows up is a degenerate dysfunctional system of government(s) in the US. The influence of money combined with contestable primaries and low voter turnout (but I hate to think what would happen under Australia’s compulsory voting system if its ethnic composition were that of the US) means that the US is surviving on the status of the US dollar and the factors conducive to successful high tech startups that you mention but is otherwise condemned by bad government driving over a cliff to disaster – though plenty of people will still be living enviable lives in America in 50 years time.

    Much will depend on the US being able to buy adequate servility from its equivalent of Russia’s serfs and the disappointed middle class still soldiering on conscientiously. Will US multinationals making most of their profits outside the US be willing to pay the taxes needed for American tranquillity?

  59. It is not necessarily about civilizating but about recognition of those under the Soviet/Russian yoke who share proximity, a ‘cultural base” and the need to appear sympathetic to those within the fold. The Caucasian Republics have always been Muslim (for the most part) until Soviet forces ethnically cleansed the native population then Stalin (It takes a “Georgian” to defeat a Georgian”) further cleansing, brought the Tsarniev brother where they were as they sought to show their solidarity with the past heritage. So the Mosque is validation or expression of symbolic trust, present and for further working together!

  60. Building 7 seems to be the last refuge of more truthers than just you. But it is astonishing that you are so bereft of fallible humanity’s normal life experience that you can’t think of half a dozen plausible sources of the reporter’s error – and cite many other such examples if you did serious research.

    Now that a video has been widely circulated showing that the building was burning fiercely all day why not just accept that someone’s message about there being another building destroyed could easily be misunderstood? (BTW no suggestion of the same explanations for collapse applying as to the twin towers but eventually the steel would have weakened – and don’t forget: the fire was bad enough for the building to have been evacuated).

    Implausibilities abound. Why would the attention to the planes crashing into the twin towers be deliberately diverted and diluted by destroying building 7?

    Why would someone tell the BBC?

    Why would anyone take the risk of planting explosives there (not that any trace has been discovered)?

    Etc.

    • Replies: ,
  61. Thanks, Tom. Was just about to quit this thread when your post appeared. The know-it-alls can be very boring.

  62. [more than half a million Jews the Romans butchered]

    If you believe this figure, you should also believe that the Jews themselves slaughtered many hundred thousands of civilians in the course of their rebellion. The one rests on sources at least as good as the other.

    [2,000 years of exile]

    Only in an “exile on main st.” sense. No-one forbade them to live in Palestine, where only a small proportion of them had ever lived.

  63. Well, we can probably agree about most things. I will concede that The Saker probably knows more about Russia and its immediate environment than about Islam and its divisions. Although, as he often points out, Islam is present within Russia and Russian culture, and the Russians seem to be more understanding and sympathetic towards Islam than the West.

    But even if, as you maintain, there is little evidence for his idea that Anglo-Zionists are behind Wahabbi-Takfirist terrorism, I am still interested in the fact that he has such views. Knowing far less than The Saker – and, judging from what you say, less still than you – I still value the opinions of someone I consider well-informed, sensible, and judicious.

  64. Putin has indeed made a civilizational choice, and it is one that will not have good consequences for Russia in the long term.

    Two points, however:

    1. Chchens did not go to the defense of Orthodox Christians in the Donbass. They simply went into a low level imperial fight started by Putin. Ukraine is largely Russian Orthodox. Because of Putin’s actions, many orthodox parishes are switching from the Moscow Patriarchate to the Kievan Patriarchate. Putin’s actions have been counterproductive.

    2. The “Nazis” in Ukraine are a figment of a propagandist’s fertile imagination.

    • Replies:
  65. What a shallow piece of historiosophy. Russia *is* a part of the West with some peculiarieties (as are Germany, Poland, Norway,…). There is not a piece of Russian high culture that is not Western.

    That’s what you get when you mix political games du jour with a serious analysis of a civilization. Russia and Islam do not have cultural affinities, just, when you got so many indigenous Muslims within your borders, you have to be realistic.

    And for God’s sake, stop equating Europe with a suicidal liberalism.

    • Replies: ,
  66. Hi wizard,

    But it is astonishing that you are so bereft of fallible humanity’s normal life experience that you can’t think of half a dozen plausible sources of the reporter’s error – and cite many other such examples if you did serious research.

    by all means, please edify us with at least one of these ‘half a dozen plausible sources of the reporter’s error”.

    how was it possible to have advance knowledge of an event that thousands of experts to this day say is an impossibility? That a steel frame building would collapse in the manner of a controlled demolition because of office fires. How was it possible for her (or the people who handed her the script) to know (and describe the manner of exactly how)that building was going to plop into its basement at free fall speed into a nice little pile ~ before it did?! And why did they ship off all of the forensic evidence and have it destroyed? Wouldn’t it serve some purpose to try to understand how this engineering impossibility happened? So they can take steps to prevent it in the future?! And why didn’t they even mention building seven in the 911 Commission Report?! Did they just forget to? Was it not important?

    Why would someone tell the BBC?

    to condition the people to the false narrative that the building fell because of some office fires

    but they f’d up, and reported it before the building fell, thereby exposing the fact that it was an inside job and that our government and the entire western/Zionist media was all in cahoots, like they were when Israel attacked the USS Liberty. Or the Lavon Affair, etc..

    Why would anyone take the risk of planting explosives there (not that any trace has been discovered)?

    it’s isn’t a matter anymore of why plant the explosives, the building collapsed in an obvious controlled demolition. The explosives were planted. Now it’s just a matter of figuring out who planted them. Was it Osama bin mystery cadaver who did it? Or the Mossad and government operatives working under men like Dov Zakheim in our “own” government?

    as for traces of explosives, before you say things on the Internet, you should do the research

    the traces of Nano-thermite were discovered a very long time ago by men like American physicist Dr. Steven Jones

    http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/thermite/explosive_residues.html

    • Replies:
  67. VY,

    No writing on earth can be completely unbiased. That is well understood.

    But it can be fair, and it can show great respect for the opposing views. And that is what the entry does.

    It was not written by some uneducated hack, but by the eminent historian Adrian Fortescue. As far as your objections to the phrase “Eastern Schism”, call it then, simply, The Schism, because that’s what it was and is. It was also totally unnecessary.

    It is one other thing, too: it is preventing (in some quarters at least) the working together of Christian brothers to defeat our common enemy.

  68. { The “Nazis” in Ukraine are a figment of a propagandist’s fertile imagination.}

    Imagine this:

    https://www.pinterest.com/pin/536702480570400549/

    Ukrainian Azov battalion giving the Nazi salute and proudly holding the Nazi swastika flag.

    And no need to post links to images of UkeNazi leader Oleg Tanybuk imitating Hitler: it is all over the web. No need to imagine: look it up.

    • Replies:
  69. Thanks Tom.

    I discovered The Saker shortly after the coup in Kiev. I first came to this blog when Saker announced that he would be posting here. I am rather surprised that The Saker is so poorly received in the com boxes. Something about casting pearls comes to mind. Still – the freedom to “bitch and launch bigoted tirades” is part of the charm of this blog. I very much enjoy the Unz Review and keep coming back.

    If anyone will care to get to know Saker as a person I recommend his podcasts.

    http://thesaker.is/category/podcasts/

    • Replies:
  70. But it is astonishing that you are so bereft of fallible humanity’s normal life experience that you can’t think of half a dozen plausible sources of the reporter’s error …

    The only error I see here is the fact that she reported an event before it happened. I don’t personally know how this was possible. You’re free to speculate.

    Why would the attention to the planes crashing into the twin towers be deliberately diverted and diluted by destroying building 7?

    An obvious possibility is that bldg. 7 was supposed to have been hit by the plane that went down in Pennsylvania. Remember “Let’s roll”? Whoever planned this wasn’t counting on a bunch of passengers ambushing the hijackers and crashing the plane before it reached its intended target. My guess is that the building had already been rigged with combustible or explosive material beforehand (probably like the other two), and once a sufficient amount of sparks and flaming debris from bldgs. 1 and 2 struck it, it caught fire and went down.

  71. Why should the 9/11 Commission report have dealt with building 7.

    They intended to deal presumably with the towers that had been directly attacked by aircraft being flown into them. Why should they have extended the inquiry to include the similar collapse of a building which had fires burning in it for enough hours to have weakened even a protected steel framework?
    Were explosions heard in WTC 7 which required explanation as it can be argued was the case for WTC 1 & 2?

    • Replies:
  72. Russia is part of the West? Only if it thinks so. And we don’t think so. West is a deviation from common Christian civilization originating from Antiquity. Russia is a rightful heir to Ancient Greece and Christian Roman Empire. Modern West is result of harmful mutation, a dead end of human development. Russian way is human development, Western way is decadence and dehumanization. Roman catholicism and Western philosophy is morally bankrupt since crusades.

    • Replies: ,
  73. Great to see you here!

    “Dr. P” from Disqus.

  74. Russian way is human development, Western way is decadence and dehumanization

    HIV rate , Russia: 1.1%
    HIV rate, USA: .6% (most of whom probably belong to minority subpopulations)
    HIV rate, France: .4%
    HIV rate, Germany: .1%

    Abortion rate, Russia (2013): 534
    Abortion rate, USA (2013): 252.7

    Homicide rate, Russia: 9.2
    Homicide rate, USA: 4.7
    Homicide rate, France: 1.0
    Homicide rate,Germany: .8

    I’d say aborting children, getting HIV and killing someone is a better example if not of decadence, then at least of severe moral failings in the society.

  75. Avery remember when you foolishly claimed Russian nationalists loved Putin and that Putin was a Russian nationalist?

    Oops:

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/prosvirnin-shoahed/

    “One of the more frustrating misconceptions Westerners have about Russia – including even many of the more well meaning ones – is that Putin is some kind of nationalist.

    He is not. Nor was he ever.”

    • Replies:
  76. remember when you, in desperation, foolishly latched on to some anonymous poster called ‘Angry Slav’ to make your case against President Putin.

    Oops.

    Next time tell your buddy to post under a more believable handle: ‘Angry Slav’ is too obvious.

    • Replies:
  77. Western civilization is a compound of, at least, three ingredients: Greco-Roman heritage, Christianity & rational-scientific Enlightenment. Russia has all three components, but it would be foolish to deny that West, from England to Germany, had been the spiritus movens of the dominant third component (Descartes, Locke, Newton, Voltaire, Kant,…).

    You seem to consider the desirable West to be some kind of Christian theocracy. Vitality of Western expansion from the 11th C on refutes you. By the way, what you wrote about Western philosophy (and one might add science) is such a nonsense one simply need not bother to reply.

  78. sure there were explosions, but more to the point building seven was a modern steel frame high rise, and this is how it fell -

    at free-fall speed neatly into its basement

    you don’t think something like that should be investigated for an explanation?

    as for:

    extended the inquiry to include the similar collapse of a building which had fires burning in it for enough hours to have weakened even a protected steel framework?

    many steel frame buildings have burnt like infernos for many hours and none plopped into their basements

    http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/other_fires.htm

    so the event of building seven falling because of some office fires is not just an impossibility based on common sense and what our eyes tell us, but thousands upon thousands of professionals and experts have signed their reputations on the line saying that fires could not have brought building seven down the way NIST and the government say it did.

    so

    since there is this great discrepancy between what is obvious and the lies we’re being told by the officials in DC and the controlled media, some of us think it is rather telling that they seemed to consider it of no consequence that this building fell and there’s no explanation for it other than it was wired for a controlled demolition. And you see if it was wired, then so too were the other towers, which makes sense when you see the orange molten metal flowing out of the buildings and the squibs blowing out as the buildings begin to fall.

    in fact the whole thing makes sense once you begin to delve into the personalities and the PNAC boyz behind all the wars and their stated need for a ‘new Pearl Harbor like event’

    • Replies:
  79. As before, I thought it might be useful to actually read the contents of the official NIST report so it might serve as the basis for a debate. Here are excerpts of the most pertinent sections of the Executive Summary (emphasis mine):

    PRINCIPAL FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION

    The fires in WTC 7 were ignited as a result of the impact of debris from the collapse of WTC 1, which was approximately 110 m (350 ft) to the south. The debris also caused structural damage to the southwest exterior of WTC 7, primarily between Floors 7 to 17. The fires were ignited on at least 10 floors; however, only the fires on Floors 7 through 9 and 11 through 13 grew and lasted until the time of the building collapse. These uncontrolled fires had characteristics similar to those that have occurred previously in tall buildings. Their growth and spread were consistent with ordinary building contents fires. Had a water supply for the automatic sprinkler system been available and had the sprinkler system operated as designed, it is likely that fires in WTC 7 would have been controlled and the collapse prevented. However, the collapse of WTC 7 highlights the importance of designing fire-resistant structures for situations where sprinklers are not present, do not function (e.g., due to disconnected or impaired water supply), or are overwhelmed.
    Eventually, the fires reached the northeast region of the building. The probable collapse sequence that caused the global collapse of WTC 7 involved the initiation of the buckling of a critical interior column in that vicinity. This column had become unsupported over nine stories after initial local fire-induced damage led to a cascade of local floor failures. The buckling of this column led to a vertical progression of floor failures up to the roof, and led to the buckling of adjacent interior columns to the south of the critical column. An east-to-west horizontal progression of interior column buckling followed, due to loss of lateral support to adjacent columns, forces exerted by falling debris, and load redistribution from other buckled columns. The exterior columns then buckled as the failed building core moved downward, redistributing its loads to the exterior columns. Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit. This was a fire-induced progressive collapse, also known as disproportionate collapse, which is defined as the spread of local damage, from an initiating event, from element to element, eventually resulting in the collapse of an entire structure, or a disproportionately large part of it.

    Simulations of hypothetical blast events show that no blast event played a role in the collapse of WTC 7. NIST concluded that blast events did not occur, and found no evidence whose explanation required invocation of a blast event. Blast from the smallest charge capable of failing a single critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 dB to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile. There were no witness reports of such a loud noise, nor was such a noise heard on the audio tracks of video recordings of the WTC 7 collapse.
    There were no serious injuries or fatalities, because the estimated 4,000 occupants of WTC 7 reacted to the airplane impacts on the two WTC towers and began evacuating before there was significant damage to WTC 7. The occupants were able to use both the elevators and the stairs, which were as yet not damaged, obstructed, or smoke-filled. Evacuation of the building took just over an hour. The potential for injuries to people leaving the building was mitigated by building management personnel holding the occupants in the lobby until they identified an exit path that was safe from the debris falling from WTC 1. The decision not to continue evaluating the building and not to fight the fires was made hours before the building collapsed, so no emergency responders were in or near the building when the collapse occurred.
    The design of WTC 7 was generally consistent2 with the New York City Building Code of 1968 (NYCBC), with which, by PANYNJ policy, it was to comply. The installed thicknesses of the thermal insulation was consistent with the fire rating required by the NYCBC. The stairwells were narrower than those required by the NYCBC, but, combined with the elevators, were adequate for a timely evacuation on September 11, 2001, since the number of building occupants was only about half that expected during normal business hours.
    The collapse of WTC 7 could not have been prevented without controlling the fires before most of the combustible building contents were consumed. There were two sources of water (gravity fed overhead tanks and the city water main) for the standpipe and automatic sprinkler systems serving Floor 21 and above, and some of the early fires on those upper floors might have actually been controlled in this manner. However, consistent with the NYCBC, both the primary and back-up source of water for the sprinkler system in the lower 20 floors of WTC 7 was the city water main. Since the collapses of the WTC towers had damaged the water main, there was no secondary supply of water available (such as from the gravity-fed overhead tanks that supplied water to Floor 21 and above) to control those fires that eventually led to the building collapse.
    Other than initiating the fires in WTC 7, the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7. The building withstood debris impact damage that resulted in seven exterior columns being severed and subsequently withstood fires involving typical office combustibles on several floors for almost seven hours. The debris damaged the spray-applied fire resistive material that was applied to the steel columns, girders, and beams, only in the vicinity of the structural damage from the collapse of WTC 1. This was near the west side of the south face of the building and was far removed from the buckled column that initiated the collapse. Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from fires having the same characteristics as those experienced on September 11, 2001. The transfer elements such as trusses, girders, and cantilever overhangs that were used to support the office building over the Con Edison substation did not play a significant role in the collapse of WTC 7.

    • Replies: ,
  80. Anonymous poster said exactly what Karlin correctly states that Russian nationalists say.

    But thanks for pointing out that the angry Slav guy was right, and you were a fool, as usual :-)

    Should I repost your amazing claims about Putin being a nationalist?

    • Replies:
  81. The key to defeating radical Islam is simple: economic opportunities, education, and most important of all, cultural integration. If you can get them to drink with you and eat a pork roast once in a while you’ve already won. I can attest to this as someone who lives in a western city with a large Muslim population and can see the huge distinction between the Muslim who keeps to his own, and the Muslim who goes to university with westerners and adopts our ways.

    Selection error…

    As for Japan, they’re dying a slow, agonizing death. Their economy and demographics are both in long-term decline and their society and culture are in decay. In 100 years they won’t be able to defend themselves against the invading Muslim hordes from North Africa, much less in 1000 years, at which point Japanese culture will be a relic of history.

    The UN believes that Japan will have the highest HDI in the world in 30 years time. Its population is returning to pre-20th century numbers. These two are not unrelated.

    Japan will remain a home for the Japanese and, in a future era of drone warfare, they will defend it easily.

    We, with your Muslim immigration, will have decreased development and we will no longer have a home nor exist.

    Your hope for some sort of cultural reproduction via other peoples is fanciful. What even does that mean? That Muslims in 2100 will somehow be living like us today? How does that benefit us? Have you thought out these ideas at all or just parrotted ‘good thinking.’

  82. Go ahead.

    continue with your incoherent ramblings: free freak show.

  83. had the sprinkler system operated as designed, it is likely that fires in WTC 7 would have been controlled and the collapse prevented.

    gol darnit ~

    those sprinkler systems !

    wow goat

    is this you

    http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2088/2881/1600/manforallseasons_31.jpg

  84. I noticed you chose not to comment about the lack of evidence for a blast:

    Simulations of hypothetical blast events show that no blast event played a role in the collapse of WTC 7. NIST concluded that blast events did not occur, and found no evidence whose explanation required invocation of a blast event. Blast from the smallest charge capable of failing a single critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 dB to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile. There were no witness reports of such a loud noise, nor was such a noise heard on the audio tracks of video recordings of the WTC 7 collapse.

    And what’s with the “goat” remark? Can’t you truthers debate the facts without resorting to ad hominems? I guess if you can’t attack the other person’s argument, the next best thing is to attack the other person, right?

    • Replies: , ,
  85. I am rather surprised that The Saker is so poorly received in the com boxes.

    Well, once you grasp that this site is utterly infested with trolls, disinfo specialists, it’s not so “surprising”.

    Infuriating, frustrating, disheartening, yes…. but not surprising.

    • Replies:
  86. Who recognizes Moscow as “the Third Rome and seat of Christendom” ?
    Other than the Russians, that is.

  87. Can’t you truthers debate the facts without resorting to ad hominems?

    I don’t think you know what the term “ad hominem” means. For example, when I refer to your as a liar, that is not an ad hominem, because I have meticulously demonstrated that you are a liar.

    http://www.unz.com/tengelhardt/mantra-for-911/#comment-1135150

    Ad hominem is when somebody simply insults you rather than address your argument. That behavior is actually very typical of defenders of the official story (this one and other ones like JFK etc….). Rather than address the arguments (which are overwhelming) that the official story in question is false, they resort to all these epithets such as “conspiracy theorist”, “truther” and the like.

  88. As before, I thought it might be useful to actually read the contents of the official NIST report so it might serve as the basis for a debate.

    Simply copy-pasting a bunch of text does not demonstrate that the story is true. I could copy-paste the biblical creation story, for example, and that would not constitute proof that the story is true…

    How about this to focus a debate? Answer this:

    If the proffered explanation of building 7 is satisfactory then why have thousands of architects and engineers signed a petition calling for a new investigation into this?

    And maybe this as well:

    Is there any other known case, before or since, of anything similar happening? I.e. a huge steel framed building collapsing symmetrically into it’s own footprint from randomly spreading fires?

    • Replies:
  89. Read the parts that geokat highlighted re: simulations.
    You said:

    If the proffered explanation of building 7 is satisfactory then why have thousands of architects and engineers signed a petition calling for a new investigation into this?

    Do you know that if one poses a question to large populations (100k +) regarding the metrics (say height, weight, volume) of an object, the average of all responses are invariably and incredibly accurate? So are the beliefs of the much, much greater population when it comes to CTs.

    According to the Institute of Chartered Architects and Engineers (google it), there are about 2.5 m architects and about 5 m Engineers. Of those, 3000 signed your damn petition, which makes (3000/7,500,000) = 0.0004 or 0.04%: about the same percentage of truthers in the global population, I would suspect.

    Other than that, once again, I recommend medication.

    • Replies:
  90. And what’s with the “goat” remark?

    well I guess I was starting to think you weren’t just monumentally, staggeringly imbecilic, but rather dishonest

    anyone who still believes after watching the videos of building seven imploding and all of the subsequent evidence that betrays a colossal stench in the official narrative – that building seven imploded like it did due to office fires- is I’m afraid either very, very stupid – or simply dishonest

    So my apologies for assuming you were being dishonest

    the alternative is definitely possible, if rather amazing I must say ; )

    • Replies:
  91. Of those, 3000 signed your damn petition, which makes (3000/7,500,000) = 0.0004 or 0.04%: about the same percentage of truthers in the global population, I would suspect.

    You’re peddling a well known fallacy, Shama. By your reasoning, if a million people marched on Washington demanding an end to the wars, you would dismiss this as meaningless because 300+ million did not march, and thus, are obviously in favour of all the wars.

    You should really find a lower end site to troll in. Here, you are something of a running joke, peddling these sophomoric fallacies. Just about everybody sees through you here.

    Now, as for your conjecture that 0.04% of the global population are “truthers”, aren’t you just jumping the shark now? Heck, even in the U.S. polls show that quite a few people doubt the official story. But that’s in the U.S. where the propaganda machine is at its strongest and most pervasive. In the world as a whole, globally, the general view is that the U.S. government story is highly fishy. In just about every country, that is the view of either an outright majority or a fairly large plurality.

    According to a wikipedia page I just came across, a 2008 poll found that in only 9 of 17 countries did the majority of the people think that Al Qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks. I quote:

    A poll taken by WorldPublicOpinion.org, a collaborative project of research centers in various countries managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, College Park, polled 16,063 people in 17 nations outside of the United States during the summer of 2008. They found that majorities in only 9 of the 17 countries believe al-Qaeda carried out the attacks.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polls_about_9/11_conspiracy_theories

    So in 8 of the 17 countries, the view that Al Qaeda did it was actually held by fewer than 50% of those polled.

    But, of course, this is the general population in the various countries. If you took the subset who has actually studied the question at all, I am sure the percentage who believe the U.S. govt story would be far lower. Most people, for example, do not even know that a third building collapsed in Manhattan on 9/11, or that there is any controversy over this, since this is almost never mentioned on the mainstream media. Of those who have minimally studied these questions, very large numbers of people disbelieve the official story.

    Anyway, we’ve been through this, haven’t we? I asked you what the strongest proof was for the official story and you tried to avoid answering. Finally you pointed to a page outlining the official story as proof of the official story. You obviously had nothing. And you still obviously have nothing. That’s why you’re peddling these obvious fallacies and insinuating things about people’s mental health. You’re reduced to this because you don’t have any actual argument in favour of your position that withstands the proverbial laugh test!

    • Replies:
  92. well I guess I was starting to think you weren’t just monumentally, staggeringly imbecilic, but rather dishonest

    Rurik, I outlined a glaring example of this Geokat individual’s dishonesty here:

    http://www.unz.com/tengelhardt/mantra-for-911/#comment-1135150

    At least I consider this to be a glaring example of the person’s dishonesty. You are a very generous, tolerant guy, far more than I, but do you have some generous interpretation of this? You know, he burns the candle on both ends, presenting himself as a “skeptic”, that he is not defending any “default position” — you know, a fence sitter — and then his position switches over to just assuming that the govt story is true and derisively referring to people like you and me as “truthers”. In my view, there is absolutely no way that an honest participant would behave the way he does.

    Also, note that I outline the dishonesty, openly call the guy a liar and he never responds. True, he later starts whining that I call him a liar, but when I outlined the case that he had been caught lying, he didn’t even attempt to justify himself. The above-linked comment went unanswered.

    So, I mean, if I point out that the guy is a chronic liar and he won’t even defend himself, I would suggest that you not bother to defend him…. :-)

    Look, man. This site is totally infested with these sorts of trolls. I don’t claim to know what the best strategy for dealing with them is, but I don’t really see why one should bend over backwards to pretend that they are engaging in good faith, when obviously they are not.

    • Replies:
  93. Hey JR,

    Yea, I kind of see your frustration with these types. Like I said, Sam is tribal, and if he senses that the truth about 911 would not be good for the tribe, then he’s going to do his best to do what he perceives is in the interest of the tribe., right or wrong – true or false.

    With the goat, I guess I’ve just had so many dealings with people who’re so remarkably stupid that I’m always reevaluating the depths of human stupidity -or cowardice as the case may be. There seems to be no bottom to the abyss of both of those human traits from what I’ve glimmered. So when I read these people who’re incredulous as to 911, I always try to understand that what their resisting is the acceptance that our own government- the people paid and trusted to protect us all, were the very ones to facilitate this unprecedented atrocity.

    It’s understandable that for so many that is a bridge too far. It requires that a person set aside everything he thinks he knows, and accept that humans are capable of more treachery and evil than it seems possible.

    So, I try to be gentle and forgiving. To a point. But the goat has been here for some time now. There’s been quite a slew of evidence coming forth here on this site and especially since at least I’ve been here. Too much in fact to just be ignorant of it all. It would be understandable if someone like the goat were just quietly ruminating at it all, and trying to honestly absorb all the info and make rational judgments. But that’s not what the goat is doing. What the goat is doing is repeating some of the more outrageously asinine statements that have come out of the official circles. Like if only those darn sprinklers would have worked! Then building seven would never have plopped into its basement at free-fall speed, unimpeded by things like the resistance of a steel structure that was holding the building up.

    So yea, eventually you get to the point where you realize you’re not dealing with straight shooters or people seeking knowledge in good faith. But rather pathetic shills. And when that happens it’s understandable when the kid-gloves come off.

    ~R

    • Replies:
  94. Not quite so fast Revusky.

    if a million people marched on Washington demanding an end to the wars, you would dismiss this as meaningless because 300+ million did not march, and thus, are obviously in favour of all the wars.

    A war that is in progress, is, well, something rather factual, as opposed to stabs in the darkness of your un-medicated, troubled imagination.

    Troll or not (I’ll let Ron Unz decide), I could not help noticing your meerkat like appearance in these pages. You know those little creatures intermittently popping up from under the topsoil?

    http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://cdn2.arkive.org/media/D4/D41E5BDF-B44D-41BA-8375-262D4B179E3A/Presentation.Large/Meerkat-resting-at-burrow-entrance.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.arkive.org/meerkat/suricata-suricatta/photos.html&h=435&w=650&tbnid=rTLCZCaUHedVJM:&docid=YSXYJSEYf7rmoM&ei=P9MKVtKeEczNepKqmIAL&tbm=isch&ved=0CGIQMygiMCJqFQoTCJK6ge_qnMgCFcymHgodEhUGsA

    But, of course, this is the general population in the various countries. If you took the subset who has actually studied the question at all, I am sure the percentage who believe the U.S. govt story would be far lower

    Yes I do know what you are saying: the right thing do when studying Climate Science, e.g., is for one to go and consult the local shamans while dancing around a fire to summon the rain gods.
    Thus while one ignores that over 80% of all respondents in those polls think that it was Al Qaeda or they simply don’t know, one should rely on the finely honed opinions of the people of Pakistan, your usual source for matters relating to Global Intelligence.

    Anyway, we’ve been through this, haven’t we? I asked you what the strongest proof was for the official story

    Oh that is rather simple.
    My strongest proof is that the story, converse in conclusion to the one provided by the 9/11 commission, is peddled by you and your fellow meerkats all over the internet.
    QED.

    • Replies:
  95. Like I said, Sam is tribal, and if he senses that the truth about 911 would not be good for the tribe, then he’s going to do his best to do what he perceives is in the interest of the tribe.,

    Rurik,
    are you still upset about the Fed chronicles? Furthermore, were you not aware that all Christians are perfected “Joos” and therefore members of my tribe?

    • Replies:
  96. why heck no Sam,

    why would I be?

    besides, you lost that one remember?

    yea, I once heard someone say Jews are unperfected Christians or something. Actually I think it was Ann Coulter who said that to some Jewish guy and he got all in a huff about it. People can be very sensitive about religion I guess.

    As for 911, someone once mentioned that Jews rarely take on the role of truthers. And since we all know a lot of Jews are smart cookies and like tearing down the oppressive institutions of a rigid patriarchy, it seems odd that there seems to be a dearth of Jewish voices in the truther ranks. But then again, when you consider Israel’s obvious roll and that of the Jewish media in the perpetration of the crime and its subsequent cover up respectively, then it sort of makes more sense I suppose.

  97. “Malaysia has summoned China’s ambassador to clarify his remarks criticizing extremism and racism ahead of a planned pro-Malay rally in the capital. Local newspaper The Star said on Friday Ambassador Huang Huikang had warned that Beijing had no fear of speaking out against actions that threatened its interests and affected the rights of its people.”The Chinese government opposes terrorism and any form of discrimination against races and any form of extremism,” The Star quoted Huang saying.

    Huang’s reported comments preceded a planned rally by a Malay-dominated, pro-government group that was reported to demand more Malay participation in Petaling Street, where most vendors are ethnic Chinese.

    China’s Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Malaysia’s foreign ministry said it would meet Huang on Monday to clarify comments that “attracted attention and caused concern to the Malaysian public”.

    Huang made the comments during a visit to the popular Petaling Street market, known as Chinatown, on Friday.

    (Reporting By Al-Zaquan Amer Hamzah; Additional reporting by Ben Blanchard in Beijing; Editing By Praveen Menon and Eric Meijer)

    Reuter Sundy Sept 27th 2015

    ISIs is flooding Chinese space to save their co religionist . China is threatening Mayasia to save its co something . Not the first time though, it issued much dire warnings to Indonesia in 1999

    • Replies:
  98. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/27/us-malaysia-china-idUSKCN0RR05920150927

    Like Turk ,China is returning to but to somehwere they have never been .

  99. Look, man. This site is totally infested with these sorts of trolls. I don’t claim to know what the best strategy for dealing with them is, but I don’t really see why one should bend over backwards to pretend that they are engaging in good faith, when obviously they are not.

    To Ron Unz:

    Not sure if you recall one of my previous comments in which I shared my suspicions that a few of the recent arrivals may have an ulterior motive. I now see through their strategy. Needless to say, it won’t work.

    btw – the best detector for ferreting them out is the degree to which they hurl abusive terms in their posts. Based on this amateurish display, I’m reminded of the cartoon character Wile E. Coyote, who’s always looking for a new plan from Acme Inc. with which to catch roadrunner. It’s back to the drawing board for the MFA.

  100. says:
         Show CommentNext New Comment

    The Saker, who worked for NATO in intelligence in the Serbian conflict, is now engaging in Psyops against Christians again. Why ?, because he is a Muslim working for the Muslim Brotherhood. Nothing else needs to be explained if you understand the MB agenda in the ME,Syria in particular, and in fomenting war between the USA, EU and Russia. The MB was created in WW2, and they have not forgotten the advantages to Islam of having Christian countries at war with each other.

    • Replies:
  101. The idea of a diabolically cunning and immensely powerful MB that is behind every bad thing that one can imagine may be the stupidest yet advanced in this debate. Congratulations to you.

  102. Why ?, because he is a Muslim working for the Muslim Brotherhood.

    If Saker were with the Muslim Brotherhood, he would not support Shiites (Iran, Hezbollah, Houthi, etc.). However they may have begun, the Brotherhood has long since turned into tools of the NWO–witness Obama slobbering all over them when they (temporarily) took over Egypt. The Brotherhood were also the ones who initially militarized the protests in Syria, turning them into a jihadist bloodbath.

    Another point that should be mentioned is that, if Saker were still loyal to NATO, he would not spend so much time exposing their lies and atrocities in Yugoslavia. And he certainly wouldn’t be backing Serbia and Macedonia.

  103. if a million people marched on Washington demanding an end to the wars, you would dismiss this as meaningless because 300+ million did not march, and thus, are obviously in favour of all the wars.

    A war that is in progress, is, well, something rather factual, as opposed to stabs in the darkness of your un-medicated, troubled imagination.

    This is just deliberate obtuseness on your part. It has nothing to do with the example of marching against a war specifically. It’s just that your argument is based on a well known logical fallacy.

    I could just as well say abstractly: if a million Americans march (or sign a petition or whatever) against X, that does NOT mean that the other 300+ million Americans are in favour of X.

    For example, it could just as well be: By your reasoning, if a million people went to Washington and marched against gay marriage, that doesn’t mean anything, since there are 300+ million people who did not march and they obviously all favour gay marriage.

    The basic argument you make is amazingly dishonest even by your very low standards. Anybody who wasn’t born yesterday knows that an awful large number of people would be very reluctant to stick their neck out and sign a petition that explicitly says that the government is lying about the events of 9/11. This goes all the more for people in science/tech sorts of fields because so much of the money there comes (directly or indirectly) from the government.

    OBVIOUSLY the absolute number of professional architects and engineers who do not sign such a petition is always going to be far greater than the number of those who do.

    What’s actually funny though is that the argument is doubly fallacious anyway, since objective reality is not determined by majority vote or popular opinion anyway. Objective reality just exists.

    That said, your conjecture that 9/11 truth is some ultra minority opinion in the world is obviously false. I pointed to a wikipedia page which refers to an opinion taken in 17 countries in 2008. In only 9 of the countries did the majority of respondents think that Al Qaeda perpetrated the attacks. In 8 other countries, the majority did not believe the official story.

    But think a bit. Of those 9 countries, how many are Atlanticist/Anglosphere countries — you know, U.S., Canada, U.K., Australia… — where the western MSM propaganda machine is at its very strongest. In the broader world, the view that the U.S. government is lying about what happened is actually the majority viewpoint. Moreover, this is a poll taken in 2008, seven years ago. As facts gradually seep out into the public awareness, the percentage of people who question the official story inevitably goes up.

    My strongest proof is that the story, converse in conclusion to the one provided by the 9/11 commission, is peddled by you and your fellow meerkats all over the internet.

    That’s now your strongest proof? I guess you’re just admitting (yet again) that you have no proof. Really, nothing… you say that the above is your “strongest”. So what does your less strong proof look like? (But we’ve been through all this before, remember? You have tacitly admitted that you have no proof previously.)

    It is often unclear whether you actually have a very good grasp on what the term “proof” even means. For example, on a previous iteration, I asked you what the strongest proof for the government story was and what you finally produced was a wikipedia page that outlined the government 9/11 story — simply outlined it. So you seemed to think that the government story is proof of the government story. And I think this is a pattern in the way you shills operate. When asked for proof of some assertion you make, the “proof” you provide is basically just to repeat the assertion. (That, or you just walk away. One or the other.)

    We just keep going back over this like a broken record and it just always comes down to the fact that, when I ask you what the proof of the government story is, you simply have none!

    So you have no proof that the government story is actually true, yet you think that the people who want a new investigation are crazy…. they started a series of wars and tortured and killed who-knows-how-many people based on a story for which there is absolutely no proof and you think that people who want an investigation of this are just obviously crazies.

    Well, maybe you’re the one who is crazy. Aside from having imaginary friends (like your ivy league shrink) you also have another of the principal traits that crazy people share: in your own mind, you believe yourself to be sane.

  104. Well, once you grasp that this site is utterly infested with trolls, disinfo specialists, it’s not so “surprising”.

    Thanks. I tend to forget that some idiots are professional idiots. It’s a rather fine distinction.

  105. The key problem with Truthers is that they confuse the fact that large events are complicated to explain, with the explanation therefore being wrong.

    The official story is the most comprehensive and believable explanation of what happened on 9/11. For it not to be, you guys would not only have to pick holes in it but actually propose an alternative theory with even fewer holes…

    Otherwise you’re just highlighting the ihe imperfection of information, which is pretty boring as everyone of any substance recognises this fact.

    Come on, give us your account of what happened…and try and explain why there’s not been one whilsteblower out of the cast of tens of thousands that would be required to stage an operation like this one. Not one person who felt even a little guilty or aggrieved or even just wanted fame?

    If you doubt how many it would take you clearly have never worked in anything like the military…I’m not just talking about the tip of the spear but the whole logistics chain, planning and training plus more! Nevermind that these types of guys drink and run their mouths all the time…by now, millions of people could have been told about this supposed operation by a primary source!!!

    • Replies: , ,
  106. Furthermore considering that the a Chinese and the Russians have had almost open access to US secrets for some time, don’t you think they might have leaked it…you know, around the time that America got sanctions placed on Russia?

    And if you think it was the Israelis, do you really believe that they are so smart of to pull this off in another country (you can times the number of people involved by five) and also keep their information secret from Russia when the US can’t?

    It’d easy from your bedroom to imagine pulling off an operation like the one that would be required to create a false flag 9/11 but if you had any real life experience of this type of thing you would find it beyond risible.

    • Replies:
  107. Sorry I hit reply to the wrong person. It should have been Rurik.

    • Replies: ,
  108. Hi Deduction,

    We already know that complicated shenanigans happen all the time. False flags and official government and media lies to get us into contrived wars. Like the ‘sinking of the Maine, or the Gulf of Tonkin, or the USS Liberty. Were any of the liars or myriad conspirators in our government and media ever held to account? There must have been thousands of people told to either shut up about it or ‘go with’ the official lies from the top down. Did we need whistle blowers to know that Israel was lying and that the cowardly attack on the Liberty wasn’t a simple case of mistaken identity? No Deduction, we didn’t require the whistle blowers from the Israeli government or military to know this. We knew it because we have brains that can process the information from our senses. We can ‘deduce’ things, you see? We have common sense, which might be rare today, yet not quite dead.

    So

    When we see building seven fall like it did, we don’t need to be told that is was a controlled demolition, we can see that. And further, when we find out that the BBC reported on building seven falling before it fell, and explained the fall as resulting from office fires, well, it just doesn’t take a genius to deduce that something stinks. They’re lying, IOW.

    Now, do I know exactly what happened? Of course not. I didn’t do it. But just as with the JFK assassination, it really isn’t that surprising that the criminals who’re responsible are not lining up to take the blame. Nor do they want their families to be renditioned off to some black site where God knows what would be done to them. Our government runs a notorious torture camp for people who’re inconvienient. There must be at least dozens of these things all over the world that, unlike Gitmo, are not out in the open. There is a very good reason why journalists like Michael Hastings are not all that common. If you and your family are in the good graces of the government, like Edward Snowden was before that singularly moral man decided to take a moral stand, you enjoy lots of perks. He lived in Hawaii and had a very cushy salary and tons of perks. But then when he crossed the PTB, they were willing to show just how contemptuous they really were of concepts like the Rule of Law, or International Law when they sought to get their hands on him- probably to torture him to death and make an example of him. There are very real motivations for not being a whistle blower Deduction.

    So, just as with the Lavon affair and other government murderous perfidious treacheries, there is precedent for this kind of thing. And we know that the people known as the ‘neocons’ very much wanted to get this country into a war in the Middle East. {Duh}. Have you ever heard of the Project for a New American Century Deduction? (or the CFR or a hundred other dens of collusion and treason) No? Then I would suggest you do a little research. It could be very enlightening for you. These Zioboyz who’ve been running the show in the west from London and Tel Aviv and NYC have been at this for decades. Just reading Thomas Friedman for the past dozen or so years and you know the score. It’s surprising how naïve so many people on the Internet can be.

    So no, I don’t know exactly how it was pulled off. That’s why all of us “truthers” as we’re called, simply want a real investigation. Not one headed by Henry Kissinger ! (their first pick to head the ‘”investigation”) or Philip Zelikow. No, we need a real investigation.

    We all want to know why the Mossad agents who were arrested filming the first plane hitting the tower were not questioned to know how did they know the attack was going to take place and who else knew and why didn’t they warn us Americans? Why were they clapping and dancing and high-fiving each other at what all the rest of the world was dumbstuck and horrified at. Why were they quietly allowed to return to Israel (by duel Israeli citizen Michael Chertoff [remember him])? Along with hundreds of other known Israeli spies masquerading as ‘art students’. Why was Carl Cameron’s investigation into those spies classified?

    We want to know what is on the flight data recorders that were on those planes. Why is all that information being kept secret from the American people? What are they hiding? Are we just too much like sensitive little children to hear terrorists shouting ‘Allah Akbar’ and then hearing the screams and explosion? Or is the reason somewhat more furtive? What would a good deducer deduce in this case?

    We want to know why we aren’t allowed to see the videos of the plane hitting the Pentagon. – That is some of the most surveilled real estate in the world. There must be literally hundreds of different views of the jet approaching and crashing. Why did the FBI go to all the convenience stores and gas stations surrounding the Pentagon and confiscate any and all video? What are they hiding Deduction? Don’t you have any curiosity at all? Is your trust of the government absolute? Would the media never lie to us? What I wonder is if the government and-or the media ever tell us the truth!

    Why is there no evidence of a plane crash in Shanksville, PA? Where are the bodies and the wreckage and the ‘black boxes’ (actually the Flight Data Recorders are orange). Why is there evidence of a missile shot into an existing gorge in the landscape where they say the plane crashed?

    How is it possible that the towers and everything in them was turned to powder on that day? Those towers had substantial amounts of steel and concrete and stuff like office furniture and safes and rebar and assorted thing that usually turn up after a building collapse, the towers just turned into so much powder. How did that happen? Why is there evidence of cut beams in the wreckage Deduction?

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Scq5WpGiD4w/TmWM8tosxfI/AAAAAAAACwg/rroBM3CIRg8/s400/thermate%2Bcut.jpg

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WEpOsP2eWcs/Tjh33XGV5TI/AAAAAAAAMNM/yRzT64bq4ZU/s1600/9-11-evidence.jpg

    http://www.hoaxofthecentury.com/911Demolition1_files/Groundposts.jpg

    http://jayinreallife.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/9-11-thermate-beams.jpg

    How was Osama able to shut down NORAD and SACs from his cave in the Himalayan foothills and why did Dick Cheney tell Norman Mineta as something was heading towards the Pentagon that “the orders still stand’ (not to take action)? Why deduction? We all want to know why.

    Why didn’t the secret service whisk the chimp out of that classroom in Florida when it was clear our country was under attack? And how was he (Dubya) able to watch the first plane hit the tower? Did you know that Deduction? Did you know that Bush is on camera talking about how he watched the first plane hit the tower, and how he felt at the time that the pilot must have been a bad pilot, himself being a pilot. Well, Deduction, what we are deducing is that for Dubya to have seen the first plane hit, he must have been watching a live feed from somewhere, but we don’t know where. Perhaps from the camera the Mossad agents had set up and were recording, since they have since gone on Israeli TV and said they were there to “document the event”. Just Google those words Deduction, and you can watch them on TV.

    Why are some of Osama’s Saudi terrorists who were supposed to be on those planes and died in the crashes, why are some of them still alive today?

    How were they able to fly jets in impossible ways when they were known not to be proficient in single engine Cessnas?

    Why was the family of Osama the only ones allowed by our government to fly on the day after 911?

    Why isn’t there to this day any real evidence against Osama? Being as a known faked CIA video is hardly evidence, any more than the faked pictures they came out with of the ‘dead Osama’ were evidence of anything other than deception and sophistry. There’s really quite a lot to deduce once you get into it. And I’ve only brushed the surface here.

    The owner of the World Trade Center complex was and is a very good friend of Benjamin Netanyahu. Did you know that? Did you know that the former head of the Israeli government was on the BBC the morning of 911 talking about who Osama did it all and how this event was going to change the way we all live, and basically how we’re all going to be Palestinians now since we’re all potential terrorists. Have you been felt up at an airport recently?

    Anyways no, we “truthers” don’t know exactly how it was pulled off anymore than those of us who’re convinced elements of our own government and other shady malefactors assassinated Kennedy and got away with it. People toe the line. They know which side of the bread has the butter, and what would happen if they speak out. Remember Rosi O’Donnell? Remember how she was eviscerated for speaking out and was fired from her job and excoriated from every corner? Look at how our government and media treat an almost Christ-like figure of Edward Snowden? They want to see him tortured and crucified and made an example of as a traitor. A traitor to whom Deduction? To the Constitution that he’s risking his life to defend and preserve and protect.. or the criminal cabal who’re defiling our rights with every email they read and phone conversation they listen to.

    This is getting too long. I’ll stop for now

    (please excuse spelling and grammar errors ; )

    • Replies: ,
  109. Deduction,
    Everything you wrote up the thread is very clear to those who are in possession of their good senses. If you have the inclination to ever follow Revusky’s history with CTs and in particular 9/11, you will find that the man has been at it for 13 years (by his own admission)!! Anything that can remotely be construed as a deep government false flag operation is immediately “OBVIOUS” to him, such are his finely honed senses after decades of toil.

    Now, Revusky, read Deduction’s posts, and consider these to be my last words to you:

    (1) You need help (2) When a clearly disturbed individual comes to me and asserts that the Moon is made of cheesecake, my course of action can only be (a) to ask him get appropriate medication first and, (b) upon compliance, I can then point him in the direction of astro-physicists who have the proof that the Moon is not made of cheesecake. I do not need to get samples of that Earth satellite to humour the barmy.

    That has been my approach to you throughout the entire saga, over which you have emptied your filthy mouth on more than one occasion, on various commenters on this board.

    Good Luck JR.

    • Replies:
  110. Anyways no, we “truthers” don’t know exactly how it was pulled off

    The most believable explanation is the mainstream one. You offer no alternative theories, and instead only what look like suspicious connections until you realise that they are a few out of millions of possible connections and only suspicious by chance…because there are always suspicious connections.

    If you cannot offer a more plausible theory then you offer nothing at all.

    False flagging 9/11 would be a major operation, equivalent to a Brigade+ overseas deployment. The idea that it could be kept secret from the public, other countries’ intelligence services and anyone else is absurd.

    • Replies:
  111. The most believable explanation is the mainstream one.

    how Deduction, was the BBC able to report on something that hadn’t happened yet?

    are you saying that you believe it was a coincidence?

    what if they had reported the first plan hitting the tower 20 minutes before it did. Would you say that too was a coincidence? No reason to suspect anyone had advance knowledge, just that it was a quirk, ya know. One of those things that just kind of happens unexpectedly and there’s really no good explanation, just don’t worry about it. Nothing to pay attention to. Only weirdoes and crackpots care about stuff like that, eh?

    why did the Bush administration destroy all the forensic evidence of the crime (and engineering impossibility) before it all could be sifted over to find out how a modern steel frame building would just >>poof<< plop into its basement. Has there been any attempt to check out other similar buildings to see if they too are at risk of imploding at the first trash can that catches fire? Why not Deduction?

    You offer no alternative theories,

    I can speculate till the cows come home. Perhaps elements in the Israeli government and American Zionists wanted the US military to destroy Middle Eastern countries that didn’t like what Israel was doing to the Palestinians. But there wasn’t enough public motivation for doing so. So they decided to get guys like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld on board for a nice false flag that would accomplish many things all at once: Create a pretext for wars that could destroy all of Israel’s well-earned enemies and destroy some out-dated buildings that Bibi’s buddie Lucky Larry Silberstein could get fabulously wealthy off of, and destroy some inconvenient files in the SEC in building seven and basically find a way to turn the 21st century into a horror show of death and misery to rival the 20th century. That’s what I suspect Deduction, but alas I have no proof, other than what’s obvious, like that they’re lying about what really happened. That’s obvious to anyone with the deduction skills of a child if they bother to look behind the curtain.

    The idea that it could be kept secret from the public, other countries’ intelligence services and anyone else is absurd.

    like the attack on the USS Liberty? How was that kept under wraps for so many decades?

    Like the assassination of JFK? Or maybe you still believe in things like magic bullets

    and I suspect most other countries intelligence services know the score. Just like with the downing of MH17, everyone sort of goes along with the official narrative, even when they know it’s all lies. The US is the lone superpower. They can cause a lot of grief. I think is was the president of Pakistan that said he got a call and was told that unless he played ball, that the US would bomb his country into the stone age. That’s something we all see the US is perfectly willing to do to countries that don’t toe the line, don’t’ we Deduction? Or are you one of those people who still believe Saddam had WMD and was behind 911 and the anthrax attacks and pushed little babies out of incubators?

    • Replies:
  112. Come on, give us your account of what happened…

    Well, yeah, I’ve seen this song and dance before… but no… let’s not fall for this, shall we? Understand, boys and girls… this is very basic… If you accuse somebody of a crime, the onus is on you to provide proof that they did it. So, what, in your opinion, is the strongest proof available that the attacks of 9/11 were orchestrated by Osama Bin Laden from Afghanistan?

    This is the only rigorous way to proceed in a serious, honest discussion. Otherwise, it’s just ridiculous. By your approach, if somebody is accused of a crime, it is not sufficient to demonstrate that they could not possibly have done it — like they were a thousand miles away at the time or whatever… No, unless you can say who actually did commit the crime, they must be considered guilty by default!

    This is a very very basic logical fallacy. By this reasoning, if I do not believe that the biblical creation story is literally true, I therefore have to be able to tell you how the world came into being. Well, no… I can perfectly well be convinced that the creation story in Genesis is not true, but when asked for an alternative explanation of how the world came to be, simply say that I have no idea!

    In any case, if you claim that there were 19 Arab suicide hijackers directed by Osama Bin Laden from Afghanistan, you should be able to say what the evidence is in favour of this. What is the evidence? Just detail what you think the very strongest evidence is for this story, in your opinion, and then we could have some basis for a discussion.

    And if you won’t say what the evidence for this actually is, then, you’re obviously just another troll.

    • Replies:
  113. Deduction,
    Everything you wrote up the thread is very clear to those who are in possession of their good senses.

    That’s odd. I somehow missed the part where this Deduction fellow actually provided any evidence that the official government story on 9/11 was true!

    If you have the inclination to ever follow Revusky’s history with CTs and in particular 9/11, you will find that the man has been at it for 13 years (by his own admission)!!

    I have no idea where you are coming up with this nonsense. I have most certainly not been “at it” for 13 years. I have not. For the first ten years after the event, I broadly believed the official story. It was not until late 2011 that finally I watched some of the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth material with an open mind. I believe the first video I ever watched was the one with “Experts speak out” in the title.

    I think that’s their main presentation and it has gone through various refinements, I suppose. But, regardless, the case is absolutely devastating. There is no possible way that these monstrous steel framed skyscrapers could possibly disintegrate simply from office fires. And certainly not in a near-perfect symmetrical manner.

    But I have only been aware of this for 4 years. I don’t even say that proudly. No, I’m actually ashamed that I was duped for so long, that it took me 10 years to figure out something that is, in retrospect, so bloody obvious!

    But, regardless of your misstatement about my own personal history with this, it hardly matters. The conversation is not about me personally. You are trying to make the conversation about me personally to cover for the fact that you have nothing, no case.

    I repeatedly asked you what the strongest evidence available was that these attacks were orchestrated by a religious fanatic in Afghanistan. And you just couldn’t provide any answer to this! Nothing! At one point, you tried the sophomoric trick of pointing to a web page that outlined the official story as your “proof” of said official story!

    If you really had any legitimate argument, would you (or your fellow rat bastards here) be trying to turn this into a conversation about me? You would outline your evidence, wouldn’t you? But no, you don’t, because you don’t have any.

    Right, Sammy Boy?

    • Replies:
  114. I’m getting rather good at interpreting troll-speak. For example, when this rat says:

    The most believable explanation is the mainstream one.

    that, of course means:

    The most preposterous explanation is the mainstream one.

    And this is troll-speak as well:

    If you cannot offer a more plausible theory then you offer nothing at all.

    That means:

    Since I can’t really back up the official story factually or logically, I’m just going to sit back and demand that you tell me what happened and then play the “shifting goalposts” game of always demanding more and more proof, whatever you do…

    Then we have:

    False flagging 9/11 would be a major operation, equivalent to a Brigade+ overseas deployment

    Quite an impressive argument. It “would be a major operation”. Therefore they didn’t do it. I guess that’s proof that Pearl Harbor didn’t happen. It would have been a “major operation”. So obviously they didn’t do it!

    (It would be a “major operation” for… Deep State operatives to carry out. Too major, but somehow this handful of nutty Arab misfits were able to do it… that makes sense….)

    Cutting to the chase again: what specifically is the strongest evidence available that the official story is true?

  115. Furthermore considering that the a Chinese and the Russians have had almost open access to US secrets for some time, don’t you think they might have leaked it…you know, around the time that America got sanctions placed on Russia?

    Of course foreign countries don’t have “open access to US secrets”; if you have open access to them, then by definition they aren’t secrets.

    It is, however, quite conceivable that some countries (possibly Russia and/or China) might have clandestine access to some of our secrets. But publicly revealing what they have discovered would carry a serious risk of exposing their sources (moles, double-agents, etc.). It’s best to keep quiet about it, so that their sources can go on gathering information.

    Moreover, knowing something and being in a position to meet some court-room standard of a proof are two different things. And why would a domestic US catastrophe be their concern anyway? They would risking a lot of their credibility on something that was none of their business.

    As far as the wars that followed are concerned, is it possible that Russia and/or China might have welcomed an attack on the Taliban for their own reasons? It should be noted that, until recently, Putin did allow Bush to use Russian airspace for resupplying US force in Afghanistan. And as regards Iraq, both Russia and China vetoed that little adventure at the Security Council. Even according to the official BS story put out by Washington, it was obvious that Iraq had had nothing to do with 9/11.

    • Replies:
  116. Hi, Rurik, you provide a lot of good information for people (who really want to know) to sink their teeth into.

    One thing you left out though was the conjunction of all the drills on 9/11. Actually, once you understand how these false flags work, that alone is pretty much enough to realise that this was some sort of inside job.

    These kinds of staged events almost invariably coincide with drills. That’s how these Deep State criminals cover their tracks. There are various reasons for this. I guess a lot of the preparations for the actual event can be attributed to preparing for the drill. Also, odd stuff like… “Why were there all these crisis actors in the vicinity, etcetera…”

    The conjunction of all the drills is a dead giveaway that this is some sort of inside job. See, for example:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_government_operations_and_exercises_on_September_11,_2001

    • Replies:
  117. You’re a basement General with zero experience of operational planning. I know this because you persist in the theory that some elements somewhere might have executed this op in secret.

    Your point about the reporters highlights the flaws in your thinking.

    Either

    A) there were thousands of reportings and one person got it wrong in a coincidental way.

    Or

    B) the op was perfectly organised and executed but for some reason they told a random BBC reporter about it early.

    Those are your only choices…which one is more likely?

    • Agree: Sam Shama
    • Replies:
  118. I have to choose an account. I choose the most credible one. ..care to offer a better explanation?

    • Replies:
  119. Of course foreign countries don’t have “open access to US secrets”; if you have open access to them, then by definition they aren’t secrets.

    They’re wannabe secrets. Ill-kept by the less than perfectly competent US security services. And they’re certainly secrets from you…

    It is, however, quite conceivable that some countries (possibly Russia and/or China) might have clandestine access to some of our secrets. But publicly revealing what they have discovered would carry a serious risk of exposing their sources (moles, double-agents, etc.). It’s best to keep quiet about it, so that their sources can go on gathering information.

    Yeah because it wouldn’t be worth it for Russia to expose the US over 9/11 at all! That’d be a tiny PR coup…

  120. One thing you left out though was the conjunction of all the drills on 9/11. Actually, once you understand how these false flags work, that alone is pretty much enough to realise that this was some sort of inside job.

    Your operational experience is confined to your toy soldiers. Mine isn’t. Trust me you don’t have a clue. Security forces engage in training under every imaginable exercise scenario, often written by a drunk junior officer in the mess one night.

    This means that exercises (not drills – you’re clueless) run the gamut, from fighting Islamic terrorists, to independent Scots to zombies…

    You guys are worse chickenhawks than Wolfowitz.

  121. Hey JR,

    Yea, when I heard that they were running drills at the time of the Boston “bombing’, I sort of figured it was yet another bullshit false flag.

    And you’re right to ask these shills for some evidence of the official version of 911.

    I guess they always have the terrorist’s passport and the rental car with the Korans in them

    the amazing thing is how so little proof is needed for these narratives to take hold

    like the killing of Osama and how there’s virtually not a shred of proof that he was even there

    and we all know they were dishonest about the SEAL team going down in the helicopter and remember the photo op in the situation room where the heads of the administration were all riveted with rapt attention at the live feed from the SEAL team heroes shooting the old man with bad kidneys who could have answered so many questions, but our heroic SEALs took him out! But then the whole photo op thing turned out to be a complete fraud.

    But none of that matters! There’s no body or evidence of any body or even an eyewitness who can claim to see the dead body or any sailors on the navy ship that supposedly tossed the body into the sea that can say they saw it. There’s nothing. Just some faked photos and the narrative. The narrative that comes from the same people and same crowd that has lied to us about everything. Lied to us about the WMD, lied to us about the baby incubators and lied to us about Pat Tillman and lied to us about Jessica Lynch and lied to us every time they talk. But it’s astonishing that no matter how many lies they tell or how outrageous their lies de jour, there they are. all the little sheeple and their shills all going along with it all everytime.

    >>sigh<<

    sometimes I wonder what's the use.

    but then I think of the sacrifice that someone like Snowden made. And I start typing again.

    • Replies:
  122. You’re a basement General

    basement?

    so I guess if you doubt the official story it can only mean that you’re typing from your mother’s basement in your underwear and wearing aluminum foil on your head?

    how about trying to suggest that it was a coincidence that they reported building seven falling down before it did is silly in the extreme. Rather it is nothing less than proof positive that someone at the highest levels of the western press knew that building was going to fall. And the false narrative of why it was going to fall was being put out there to condition the public to the Big Lie that they’re trying to pull over all or our heads.

    Everything didn’t go to plan. The forth plane in all likelihood was supposed to strike building seven, thereby giving the pretext for its collapse. But the forth plane never made it, and so they had to wing it, and when they tried to wing it they f’d up, and reported the collapse before it happened, thereby proving they had advance knowledge of an event that no one except the people who had wired that building for collapse could possibly have known about. And when you see the molten steel pouring out of the other towers

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwgkA5rlwKI

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmuzyWC60eE

    and the squibs shooting out and the firemen discussing how it came down, like ‘boom, boom, boom’

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2A8VMg_B64

    it all comes together

    and it wasn’t just the BBC that pre-reported it, Fox News did too

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFdcPv3XXI

    • Replies:
  123. a paragraph by paragraph critique. (Paragraphs numbered and summarize followed by comments). Found the article, in general interesting, in spite of my criticisms.

    1. The author believes opening of the mosque in Moscow represents “… the expression of a profound civilizational choice.”

    2. The use of the description of “civilizational choice” by the west in the context of the Ukraine revolution was meant as an insult to Russians who were slighted as being primitive. But, contends the author, the “Russians never surrendered” their “ancient roots” (pre-civilization).This is his contention which the article sets out to prove.

    3. Historically, Russians are Slaves from Ukraine with Orthodox “worldview” acquired from the Eastern Roman Empire. Peter the Great and Communists tried to “westernize” Russia but Putin is now reversing this (I think Putin may be doing his own “pivot to Asia” because the west has closed the door in his face, but the author’s contention is somehow interesting so let’s see how he thinks he can prove it). He then claims that the opening of the mosque indicates an acceptance by Putin, and presumably of the Russian people of Islam as an integral (though very small, which for some reason he didn’t note) part of Russia. (I really doubt this on the part of Putin or of the Russian peoples, but I became more curious about what the author really wants to say; because even if I believe this is false, as I do, I still wanted to understand what Putin really did want to signify by his attendance at the ceremony).

    4. Nicholas II chose the mosque location ? (true ??)

    5. Chechen Muslims fought on the separatist side in Donbass ? (heard something about this from another source, may be true) These wars (Afghan, Chechnian, Donbass) pitted Russia against Wahabi-Suni Islam, not against Shia Islam. Then he contends that Saudi-Wahabi Islam “is controlled by the AngloZionist Empire” (ok, Saudi is controlled politically and supported militarily by the US, the US in tern, … accepted at last count at least half the house members to israel. Ok, it’s provocatively stated, but it’s not impossible to be able to see it this way)

    6. Putin and Russians see big difference between Shia and Suni Islam and believe Sunis to be instruments of his “AngloZionist Empire” (this was true as far as to say that the US supported the Suni-Osama to fight the soviets in Afghanistan, and it may well be what Russians believe, irrespective of what others might believe).

    7. Russian media supports the narrative of Shia-good Suni-bad which is what the populations then reflects (intersting point, about the Russian media using this angle)

    8. while the west might have learned that the crusades, organized by Catholics, opposed Islam, the Russian Orthodox learned also about the Pope’s ordering a “northern Crusade” (I didn’t know about this, but the crusades did sack Orthodox Constantinople, and Russians certainly hated the papacy for some reason, all this time (even Dostoyevsky did). Right or wrong, Russians certainly mistrusted and hated Catholics and the reason for this may well have been indoctrination but it’s not out of the question that Catholics may have played a role in justifying that hate. Russians for this or for related reasons hated and mistrusted the Polish and maybe also the Catholic Ukrainans.) He then says that Orthodox and Muslim relations were peaceful, … except for the Ottomans (who, incidentally, are also Sunis) but he maintains that that was not a religious war, but due to “an Ottoman chraracteristic” (Ottomans fighting the Russians are one big exception to his contention which he just dismisses out of hand – looses a lot of credibility here)

    9. Orthodoxy and Islam share common views on social issues. (as far as conservative morality may be concerned and as far as their opposition to secularism is concerned, yeah, maybe)

    10. Differentiation in the Russian media between Islam with respect to Syria, also because the declaration by a Sunni-supported Islamic state could happen in Afghaistan, Central Caucasus and Central Asia. (interesting point, and maybe true; it’s certainly a good tactic for the Russians to divide in order to conquer, or if not conquer at least resist)

    11. Only Islam can defeat Suni-Wahabism. Russia tries to forge ties to other branches of Islam to fight off Suni-Wahabism, because of neighboring countries such as Kazakhstan. Then he says “Ottomans used be the second worst enemy of Orthodox Christianity (after the Papacy, of course)” (this may well be what Russians believe, or have believed, but I think if they did they only meant it cynically, and the author may interpret their sentiment at face value and as justification to prove his thesis in this essay).

    12. The approach in the west (politics and media) is coarser, throwing all Muslims in the same basket. (This, I think is a good point; out of geographic necessity, Russians are bordering on Islamic countries which increases their risk. They differentiate between versions of Islam because it’s cleverer to divide your enemies than to take them all on at the same time ! Besides Sunis and Shias have repeatedly and continue to fight each other (in Yemen, most recently). The western explanation can’t seem to clear up the inconsistency that all Islamist want to destroy everyone else but can be deterred from their goal by fighting each other also). He then tries to prove that blaming the current refugee crisis in Europe will pose a cultural threat to Europe even though Romanians and Gypsies also don’t integrate into France. (Here he not only throws a red herring but also contradicts himself: Romanians and Gypsies integrate into France at rates commensurate to their development but represent such a minor percentage that it is statistically insignificant. His contradiction results from the fact that if these refugees were to go to Russia, in spite of his thesis that Orthodoxy and Shia-Islam may be at peace, they wouldn’t integrate there either, I don’t think. Besides, it’s not clear if what percentage of the refugees are what type of Islamists or Christians for that matter).

    13. here he makes a case about incidental similarities between Islamic and Orthodox customs and garb. (Though this is a little bit interesting, it’s hard to see this as anything more than just a historic accident or maybe even an assimilation of neighboring cultures. Still, I never did think about the Orthodox beards being related to the Islamist ones, hard to believe they always hated each other so much over the centuries if they adopted and maintained these similarities)

    14. Alcohol as a major dissimilarity between Orthodoxy and Islam. As a counterpoint he adds that Alcohol is sold in Islamic areas of Russia. (also a very weak and inconsequential argument. Alcohol, its purpose and usage is actually an almost philosophical difference between the societies. Like for the Irish, Alcohol is sort of like a catholic trait of allowing one to fail because God will forgive. The “God of Islam” is not so kind. But by saying that there’s more alcohol sold in Islamic areas of Russia than dry counties in the US, he’s inadvertently showing more similarity between Islam and Protestantism then Orthodoxy !!! This may indeed be an interesting thing to compare !)

    15. here he repeats the initial contention that the “rapprochement between the Orthodox and Islamic world is an expression of a ‘Russian civilizational choice’ which has given up …” trying to be part of the west and is returning to its Asiatic neighbors including the ME which, unlike the west, were influenced by the Russian culture and people. (It may be that Russia is indeed doing that, but it’s certainly not meeting its neighbors naked. It is going there in its Christian Orthodox garb which it is in the process of remaking in new, 2nd world splendor. I don’t think he’s proven this point, mostly because it’s not true, I believe, HOWEVER, I do agree that Putin has indeed made a political pivot to the ME using the approach of favoring Shia-Islam, and he may indeed have more success in doing that than the current western approach; hell, he could’t do any worse !!! But I do believe that the religious fervor in the middle east, can only be countered by an identification of Russia with it’s Orthodoxy and that, I believe Putin is very much aware of. He does not want to leave a Religious vacuum in Russia in which Islam can grow !!!)

    16. Russians may prefer friendly relations with the EU but they won’t grovel to get them. Besides the west is continually “shooting itself in the foot” in its policies in the ME and in undermining Russia through Ukraine that Russia will just wait until it comes around again. (and that may not be all that long, … provided the antagonism between Russia and the west will not lead to a war !!! If Islam was really the main concern of the US, then provoking Russia seems to be an incredibly unproductive side-venture! So much so that one would have to question what the true main concerns of the US REALLY are if they’re willing to take such a risky detour !!!)

  124. so I guess if you doubt the official story it can only mean that you’re typing from your mother’s basement in your underwear and wearing aluminum foil on your head

    You have provided no explanation of 9/11.

    You have shown no comprehension of the practicalities of operational planning.

    You have proven your ignorance of why and how security forces conduct exercises.

    You don’t even seem able to conceive of the resources involved in any large scale production! Just look at how many names there are on the end credits of a film!

    No, you add no value at all. Just a collection of circumstantial inferences and coincidences that you have drawn, from an event of incredible complexity, to look suspicious.

    This is why I conclude that you live in a basement. You have no understanding of how large scale organisation works and you really lack any awareness of the complexity of life in general.

  125. Golly, but your reply sounds a little miffed to me. Did I hit a nerve or something?

    ‘you have no comprehension and you’re ignorant and you add no value at all!!!! You live in a basement and lack awareness of life’s complexities!!!

    Gee, did I say something wrong? : D

    circumstantial inferences and coincidences

    did you watch that last video I posted? The one where Fox News reports on building seven collapsing before it did, and then you see the building go down, and the reporters seem to have an inkling as to the ramifications of what they’d just done, by reporting it before it happened.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFdcPv3XXI

    You call that a “coincidence”, and that’s fine. But there’s other people out there that might stumble on this thread and if they’re capable of thinking and reasoning, it will be obvious to them that something like that is not a coincidence. To know that building was going to collapse means that the people who handed them the script were also tied to the people who wired the building for a controlled demolition. And it wasn’t Osama and his nineteen henchmen, was it Deduction?

    I’m counting on the possibility that other readers are able to deduce things, and if so, one of the things that is easily deduced by watching a video like that is that our PTB wired building seven for a controlled demolition, and that means towers one and two were wired as well. And that means that Larry Silverstien and Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and all those Jewish neocons, including a compliant Jewish owned media, were all in cahoots to use this false flag as a pretext to make the 21st century as bloody and horrific as the last one. That is a rather complex and ambitious agenda wouldn’t you say Deduction? But those things happen all the time Deduction. We destroyed entire countries in the Middle East all based on lies. That is no small feat! That kind of thing requires “large scale organization” of “incredible complexity” does it not? But yet is happened. Our leaders used the media to lie us into bombing Iraq into the stone age. And all the lies were told with amazing uniformity all across the board. From the NYT to the newspapers of record all across Europe and Canada and even down under in Australia. Just look at these dueling puppets reading from a script

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFEudf8NOuY

    foisting this type of uniformity over the western world’s policy makers certainly does require a lot of ‘operational planning’ and ‘large scale organization’ Deduction, but just look! They pulled if off nonetheless, didn’t they?

    The answer, if you’re still struggling to come to grasp with the complexities of life, is ‘yes’. Yes, Rurik, they did pull it off. They were able to get the western world’s leaders and media on board for not just one war of aggression based on lies to destroy just one innocent country who was a threat to no one, but they managed to get the leaders of all western countries and media to lie our world into several wars of aggression on several countries, and they’re still at it to this day! Telling lies and bombing innocent countries and propping up criminal stooges like that joke in Kiev and whatever quisling is sitting in Kabul these days or Baghdad.

    So I’m glad that you’re helping us all to see just how complex this stuff really can be. It’s not tiddlywinks, that’s for sure ; )

    • Replies:
  126. And that means that Larry Silverstien and Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and all those Jewish neocons, including a compliant Jewish owned media, were all in cahoots to use this false flag as a pretext to make the 21st century as bloody and horrific as the last one.

    So now it is not just the tens of thousands actually involved in carrying out the false flag operation, and the intelligence services of all major powers but also the additional tens of thousands in the world’s media!

    Is anyone not in on this conspiracy? And how would I go about building such a titanic like ship which is completely leak proof?

    For a group of people that can’t even keep Hillary Clinton’s emails private they sure are effective at keeping this conspiracy of millions of people hushed up!

  127. If(JR re-rambles):

    If you really had any legitimate argument, would you (or your fellow rat bastards here) be trying to turn this into a conversation about me?

    then:
    Begin(response){

    http://www.unz.com/tsaker/russias-civilizational-choice/#comment-1165332

    Read: paragraph 3
    }
    end

  128. keeping this conspiracy of millions of people hushed up!

    yep

    just like Saddam’s WMD

    just like the Kuwaiti incubators. Remember them? It was all a lie Deduction. A rank, vile, despicable lie. And it led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands. And it was all a lie. And the entire western media all was complicit in the lie.

    Now just so we’re both on the same page, it isn’t like a memo is sent out saying ‘OK, everyone, we’re going to tell lies about Iraq WMD and repeat ad nauseam dishonest innuendoes about Saddam’s ties to 911. They just all get on board. They know the score.

    Ask yourself Deduction, why is it that no one in the media bothers to point out that Israel knew 911 was going to happen but didn’t warn Americans? We know Israel knew, because they had their agents filming the first plane hitting the towers and they even went on Israeli TV to explain they were there to “document the event”. So Israel knew that this horrific catastrophe was about to go down. But they kept it to themselves because they wanted a maximum number of casualties, didn’t they? Since it would generate sympathy for Israel and was “very good” according to Netanyahu when he was asked about it.

    But the thing is, why does our media stay silent about that? When our congress is voting to send Israel billions of more American dollars, why is it the media never says one word about Israel’s unspeakable treachery by allowing so many Americans (that same Americans that are taxed to send billions to Israel each year) to be slaughtered like that?

    And why is it that our media never mentions the cowardly attack that Israel waged on American sailors when it attacked the USS Liberty Deduction? Why? Have you ever asked yourself that?

    Is it because they don’t know that Israeli spies were arrested on 911 when they were seen celebrating the first jet hitting the tower? Perhaps they didn’t consider it news worthy? Or Deduction, is it just possible that reporting on something like that would not be ‘good for the Jews”? And if it isn’t “good for the Jews” then perhaps when your media is owned lock, stock and barrel by Jews, then perhaps it shouldn’t come as a shock when our media coverage is skewed and overlooks acts of treachery when those act are coming from the Jewish state?

    It may sound incredible to you Deduction, but there have been people who’ve wondered if having our entire media all owned by members of the Jewish tribe might cause some of our reporting to be a little one sided. You know, like if it was widely known that Saddam was not a favorite ally of Israel, and so telling lies about him to get Americans willing to start a war against him might be considered “good for the Jews”. You see? And so they don’t even need to be told to lie, they just already know that if a leader somewhere is acting in ways that aren’t considered “good for the Jews” that then it might just be possible for a Jewish owned media to report “news” in such a way that is less than favorable to that leader. Does that sound outrageous to you?

    Let’s look at this a little closer.. Let’s consider Putin for the moment. Now we all know that Israel is occupying the Golan Heights, and we know that if Assad’s government in Syria were to fall, that Israel would take possession of the Golan Heights, and that there are very many Israelis that would like that to happen. Such an outcome would universally be considered “good for the Jews’, you see? And so imagine then that the Jewish media gets on board to sell destroying Assad’s government, because as we mentioned, it would be good from their perspective, OK? So, if my theory is correct, then what would happened is that the entire western media and governments would all be in cahoots to tell lies about Assad and try to create a consensus to go and oust him from power, and then Israel could have the Golan Heights and all would be swell. So then what happens Deduction? I’ll tell you what.. they decide that the best way to create a consensus to get the people of the world willing to bomb Assad out, is to tell lies about the Assad government using chemical weapons against civilians and children. And so right on cue, as if by a memo that is put out, our entire media and government and the entire media and governments of the entire western world start screaming lies about how Assad used chemical weapons against children. You see? As if with one voice they all tell their agenda driven lies, lies that are intended to get lots of innocent people slaughtered because to do so would be considered “good for the Jews”. Do you see? Are you starting to get the picture? OK, so they tell their lies. But not everyone is on board! There are intelligence agencies that are not a part of their uniform agenda driven “conspiracy” if you like. Some people don’t just believe the lies we’re told endlessly but rather did some investigating on their own. And so it turns out that we discover that Assad never did use those chemical weapons on those civilians and children. But rather it was terrorists who the west was arming and funding who perpetrated the chemical attack. So then the whole lie machine is exposed yet once again, but the thing is, so long as they all lie about it all, and pretend that it doesn’t matter that they lied, then few people will care. Like you for instance. And then Putin stopped them from bombing Syria regardless of the lies they were caught telling and so then, you guessed it! Right on cue they start telling lies about Putin! He shot down that jet with civilians on it! He’s a Hitler and he’s invading Crimea!!!

    All with one voice Deduction. As if it were coming out of one place. But that’s how it’s done. When you own governments and virtually the entire media, you’re able to tell your lies as if with one voice. Saddam has WMDs and it a imminent threat!!! Gadhafi is slaughtering his own people!!!! Iran is seconds away from a nuclear bomb!!! Putin is a reincarnated Adolf Hitler and is invading Crimea and Ukraine and Poland and he must be stopped!!!!

    And there’s very few leaks to this Titanic of genocidal insanity and mass murder and war and endless atrocities, so long as they’re all considered, yep, that’s right ; ) “good for the Jews”

    not that leaks don’t occasionally happen, like when Michael Hastings was going to speak out. But then they just plug the leaks when they need to. Like that British scientist David Kelly or many, many other leaks that get plugged.

  129. I have to choose an account.

    Wow, I don’t think you are consciously trying to win some contest to see who can pack the most logical fallacies into the fewest words, but if you were trying to do that, I think you could well be world champion.

    You say “I have to choose an account”. What???!!!! This is like saying: “I have to choose a major religion to believe in.” Uhh, actually, no, you don’t! You could perfectly well be an atheist or an agnostic!

    Your argument is like saying wrt the O.J. Simpson case: “I must choose an account, so therefore I must either say:

    (a) I believe O.J. did it.

    or

    (b) I don’t believe it… BUT if I say I don’t believe it, I have to be able to tell you who did do it!

    I doubt you’re going to get any benefit from this little lesson in critical reasoning, but here goes:

    It’s more like this:

    As regards the O.J. Simpson case I can perfectly well say:

    1. I never studied the question so I just don’t know.

    or:

    2. I have studied the question BUT/AND

    2a. The available information is inconclusive so I still don’t know.

    2b. O.J. definitely did it. (Presumably you have looked at the evidence and it’s just overwhelming.)

    2c. I don’t think O.J. did it, but I don’t know who exactly did.

    2d. I don’t think O.J. did it because I can name who did it and I can provide proof

    In your universe, the only options are 2b. and 2d. Option 2c. doesn’t exist. If I don’t believe O.J. did it, I have to be able to tell you who did.

    I choose the most credible one.

    Look, your stance is a very strong 2b. Not only are you saying that the government story is true, but you are basically saying: “It is so obvious that the government story is true that anybody who expresses any doubt about it is self-evidently crazy”.

    This is equivalent to saying that there is very strong evidence. If you are so damned sure, there should be a mountain of evidence.

    I’m not even asking you what all the evidence is. I’m just saying: please say what, in your opinion, is the strongest available piece of evidence that the attacks of 9/11 were orchestrated by Osama Bin Laden from Afghanistan?

    I think it’s clear that if you won’t provide any evidence, it’s OVAH, you’re conceding the debate.

    ..care to offer a better explanation?

    No, I don’t care to. You tell me that the attacks of 9/11 were orchestrated by a bearded religious fanatic from Afghanistan named Osama Bin Laden, so you should be able to say what the strongest available evidence for this is. It should be EASY! Surely the evidence for this is OVERWHELMING!

    Obviously, I am not stupid enough to play your game. Because if I outline any alternative theory at this point, you are in the position to play the “shifting the goalposts”. You’ll ask me what the proof for that is, and regardless of what proof I provide it will NEVER be sufficient, and you will always demand more, thus shifting the goalposts.

    Of course, it gets ridiculous. Rurik is naive enough to play your game, so he shows you the WTC7 video. You then ask him to prove that there were explosives used.

    A guy shows you a video of a building being blown up and you want proof that there were explosives used. I mean, if the official story on JFK was that he choked on a bone, and you said you believed it, when somebody showed you the Zapruder film of the man being shot, you would ask the person to prove that a gun and bullets were used.

    You have a video of a dude getting shot and you ask for proof that there was a gun and bullets… You’re shown a video in which a woman reports the destruction of a building when it’s clearly standing behind her totally intact and then you say there is no evidence of any foreknowledge. We understand the game you’re trying to play. You’ll shift the goalposts and shift the goalposts — to the next bloody county if necessary.

    NO. You say these guys committed the crime, then YOU provide one single piece of evidence that this is so. That is my stance, and unlike all of your fallacious nonsense, it is reasonable and logical.

    You wanna play? Surprise me. I don’t think so. Give up. The game is over. You’re walking away now…. Right???

    • Replies:
  130. just like the Kuwaiti incubators. Remember them? It was all a lie Deduction. A rank, vile, despicable lie.

    Yes, probably it was not a mistake and it was a lie, but it was an easily exposed fiction, not a set of actions that involved a hundred thousand people…the restate of your post about how Jews hold a monopoly on power and the their own cohesiveness is just paranoid fantasy.

    For example, who’s leading the campaign for Britain leave the EU? A Jew. Who’s leading the most pro-EU of the major two parties? A self-stated friend of Hamas and Hezbollah.

    So in this example it is true that Jews have disproportionate influence but it is also true that it is very far from hegemonic or even uniform.

    • Replies: , ,
  131. You say “I have to choose an account”. What???!!!! This is like saying: “I have to choose a major religion to believe in.” Uhh, actually, no, you don’t! You could perfectly well be an atheist or an agnostic!

    So you’re saying that 9/11 never happened and the twin towers are still up? Lol.

    NO. You say these guys committed the crime, then YOU provide one single piece of evidence that this is so

    First, this is life. We have to make the best judgement we can and the mainstream story is the best choice. Proof is not required for us to believe things otherwise we would never leave our basements because leaving can never be proven to be safe….lol…Maybe I have the answer now!!!

    Anyway, we do have proof it’s called a confession. Nay, it was a boast. But I’m not falling into your trap of me being forced to defend the mainstream account of 9/11, an immensely complicated event, against having a few holes picked in it.

    AND THE FOLLOWING WINS THE DEBATE AND WILL BE MY FINAL WORDS ON THIS

    The mainstream account is the best and most coherent theory by miles. You cannot propose a better one. It is therefore the theory that sane people will work from.

    • Replies:
  132. For example, who’s leading the campaign for Britain leave the EU? A Jew.

    Nigel Farage is Jewish? Who knew!

    • Replies:
  133. So you’re saying that 9/11 never happened and the twin towers are still up? Lol.

    Oh, this is a novel line of argumentation now. If I say I don’t believe the government story, I must think that 9/11 didn’t happen!!!???

    Oh, I guess this is some sort of attempt at humour, but… I really don’t think it’s very funny. You know, maybe if you could add a laugh track. Hey, if you put that in as a feature request, maybe Ron Unz would implement it…(Site Feature Request: Ability to add laugh track to my attempts to at humour so that they are perceived as more funny than they actually are…” Maybe Ron would indulge you….)

    But seriously, guys, I have to get this off my chest at this point…. you know… the lot of you are really such pathetic arseholes. Really, you are. I don’t know how many of you there are even. It could be the same few people changing screen names to appear to be more people than you are. Or conversely, you could be working shifts, one person taking over a screen name when the other goes on break or holiday….

    I honestly don’t know, but by God, you guys really are fucking pathetic.

    Anyway, we do have proof it’s called a confession. Nay, it was a boast.

    So this is the “strongest proof” of the 9/11 story that I requested? This is what you’ve got?

    Well, okay, fine. That’s your proof, the proof you find most convincing. Okay. To each their own.

    Strange, though. How many times did I ask you this question, what the most convincing proof was? I lost count. Several times, right? If you are so convinced that this is such devastating proof, why did you not just immediately provide this?

    AND THE FOLLOWING WINS THE DEBATE AND WILL BE MY FINAL WORDS ON THIS

    Hey, man… No need to shout. Yeah, you win, dude. The proof you provided is devastating.

    Just one clarification though: if, tomorrow, I put up a video on youtube, boasting that I did it, would that be proof as well?

  134. Yea, when I heard that they were running drills at the time of the Boston “bombing’, I sort of figured it was yet another bullshit false flag.

    Yeah, well, eventually, we start seeing the patterns, right? That’s how they operate.

    These drills are really a dead giveaway. You can be damned sure that if one day the U.S. decides to invade Canada or Mexico, what they’ll do is have some major war games planned near the border for those dates.

    Of course. The thing is that this would allow them to put in place everything they need for the invasion under a plausible cover that they were just running exercises. And there are these other aspects. Like, if, at the last minute, they had to call off the invasion, the exercises provide a plausible reason for why they were massing all these troops at the border, right? Even if they aborted the invasion really late, like they’d already crossed the border and came back, they could always say that they made some mistake and crossed the border while playing their wargames…

    It gives them all these degrees of freedom to explain away things that wouldn’t be there otherwise.

    And this relates also to another aspect of what we were talking about before, which is that, not everybody is in on these operations. Most are not. Say you’re an officer on 9/12, you’re not part of the criminal cabal, and you distinctly remember that you overheard some colleagues talking on 9/10 about plane hijackings and even a plane hitting a building. You confront the people you heard discussing this and they can answer: “What do you mean? We were talking about the upcoming drill! How could we have possibly known that a plane would fly into a building for real!!!???”

    You see what I mean? Evidence of prior knowledge can be explained away as being simply prior knowledge that there would be a drill! When you really think about it, the fact that there is a drill scheduled and then the real event happens — this is a dead giveaway!

    And the funny thing is that the conjunction of the drills on 9/11 is probably even less well known to people even than the fact that three (not two) skyscrapers fell down.

    It’s the damnedest thing. In over twenty years prior to 9/11, nobody had ever successfully hijacked a single airliner in the U.S. Nonetheless, NORAD or whoever, decide to run a drill based on a scenario where several planes are hijacked simultaneously.

    MEANWHILE, the terrorists decide to plan this big operation that relies on them being able to hijack multiple airplanes on the same day, within the same hour — they make this plan despite the fact that nobody has successfully hijacked even a single airliner in the U.S. since the 1970′s! (The plan also involves people who don’t really know how to fly the planes flying the planes…. etcetera…)

    But, anyway, it goes like this: the U.S. authorities decide to drill this far-fetched multiple hijacking scenario and the terrorist actually decide to implement this far-out plot involving multiple hijackings. Completely independently, of course. I mean, this is already an amazing coincidence! The authorites decide to drill a far-fetched threat scenario and the terrorists decide to implement the same thing! Completely independently! But now, get this… by pure coincidence, the drill and the actual terrorist operation occur on the very same day! Completely independently! By pure coincidence!

    I mean, you step back and look at this, and, my God, how bloody stupid do you have to be to believe that this is really a coincidence????

    guess they always have the terrorist’s passport and the rental car with the Korans in them

    Has it ever occurred to you, Rurik, that the intended audience for this stuff is basically a population reared on… well… lowbrow Hollywood B movies…

    It’s like there are these established tropes or cues…. like some guy is dressed in black, so you know he’s a villain. Another guy goes into a bar and orders a glass of white wine (when the other fellas are drinking Bud…). So you just know he’s gay….

    And so on….

    So, it’s like… “oh, these guys had Korans! So we know they’re terrorists!”

    Those Tsarnaev brothers, I remember hearing some garbage, like somebody who was supposedly a friend of theirs saying: “Oh, they were taking Islam real seriously and going to the mosque a lot, so I was worried that they were going to do some terrorist thing…”

    Imagine if somebody said: “Oh, they were taking Judaism really seriously and going to the synagogue a lot, so I was worried that they were going to commit a terrorist act!” There would be an uproar!

    All of this ludicrous crap that people fall for. It’s all comical in a way, but really, one doesn’t know whether to laugh or to cry…

    • Replies:
  135. My half-mistake. There are two campaigns and Lord Lawson is only leading one.

  136. Since the Chinese Soccer page is on the fritz for me, my response is:

    No sense, Mr. Deduction. In basketball, we call it practice. Training is what the pros do in the off-season because they slack off and don’t practice. I was not saying that basketball practice does not exist (though Allen Iverson had his own ideas on the matter). But I sense that clarifying my point to you is not worth the effort. Do though ponder the qualification that only perfect practice makes perfect, which is akin to my point that most people who practice basketball will always suck. Many people who practice reading and writing suck too.

    Since I’m already here, and since I resent when dunces rape deduction, the hairs you are splitting about the Jews and their power are not a matter of logic but semantics, Mr. Deduction. Everyone except shills will admit that “disproportionate influence” does not but vaguely suggest the vast actual dimension of the Jew’s disproportionate influence. It is not a misnomer, but if the options are “disproportionate influence’ and “monopoly on power,” I would say that the onus of defending the weaker term definitely falls on you. (I think that more suitable than either are both “disproportionate power” and “monopoly of influence.”) But as for a lesson in logic, if Jews hold power in different parties, that is evidence for not against the position that Jews have a monopoly on power. Also, logic disqualifies loaded terms and ad hominems, which is why using “paranoid fantasy” is not a valid deduction. I suspect this fallacy of yours is tendentious: a case of projection.

    People who impute paranoid fantasies to those who don’t honor Jewish taboos about how to characterize Jewish power tend to have paranoid fantasies about gentiles who talk about Jewish power at all. Time was, common sense was enough to know that men in power get paranoid while the average man gets more or less annoyed. Back then both stations of society probably distrusted each other enough for misunderstandings to be institutional, so that imputing “conspiracy theories” back and forth perpetually would have been precisely beside the point, would have made anyone say, “What theory? Of course we can’t exactly trust them.” Speaking of semantics, the age I have in mind here is Shakespeare’s, so I would simply ask: would you say language since then has been more perfected or more corrupted?

    • Replies:
  137. Kuwaiti incubators. Remember them? It was all a lie Deduction. A rank, vile, despicable lie.

    Yes, probably it was not a mistake and it was a lie, but it was an easily exposed fiction, not a set of actions that involved a hundred thousand people

    from the press conference of the girl and the carefully staged deception all the way to Madeleine Albright’s gloating over 5,000,000 dead Iraqi children due to lack of clean water and medicine, and then the follow through to an unprovoked total war of aggression upon a defenseless and innocent country, where today the occupied US government and military have murdered over a million souls and have cynically polluted its ground with DU that will cause horrific birth defects for generations to come, all of it Deduction, all of it has been based entirely on well-coordinated and universally spoken lies. Like the script that the prime ministers of Canada and Australia were reading from. It is and was all lies. And the whole thing was done with the eager complicity of hundreds of thousands of people. Editors and journalists and diplomats and generals and colonels in dozens of countries’ governments and militaries. Thousands upon thousands of minions and apparatchiks and studio heads and staff writers and oligarchs all the way down to the lowliest privates in the armies of the ‘coalition of the willing’, all carefully running with the script.

    The people at the NYT and Fox News knew they had no evidence for the WMDs that they were accusing Saddam of having. They used innuendo. John McCain knew there was no evidence. But that didn’t stop him from spreading lies now did it Deduction?

    One wonders just how many people were necessary to deliberately tell lies in order to wage a war on an innocent country. Perhaps a better question is to ask how many of the people that knew it was all based on lies were willing to speak up.

    For that let’s just consider the US congress. These are the men and women wh0se job it is to decide to take our country to war. They have staffs and access to top secret security documents and all the rest. If anyone would have or should have known the truth about Saddam’s WMDs, then surly it was the men and women in our fecal government. But how many of them were willing to go against the narrative that was put down by that lying little bitch crying for the cameras?

    The only ones I can really think of are Dennis Kucinich, Ron Paul and Senator Robert Byrd. I’m sure there were a few others, but they were a tiny minority, compared to the rest who were complicit in the universally spoken lies. Here’s Senator Byrd speaking to the lies taking us to war and the “fabricated documents” and the total lack of any evidence for any of these so called weapons of mass destruction.

    http://www.military.com/video/operations-and-strategy/iraqi-war/senator-byrd-speaks-against-iraq-war/790088319001/

    Yet we did go to war against that country. We did show the world our ‘Shock and Awe” tactics and we did do a modern version Guernica on the people of Fallujah. And all of it, ALL of it was based on lies. And yet as if under some spell, as if by some blanket hysteria our country went over there and butchered and slaughtered over a million innocent people. We created untold millions of refugees and have plunged that country into a dystopian hell on earth, and all of it based on lies.

    So when you tell me Deduction, that it’s impossible to get so many people on board for something that is all one big fucking lie like 911, then I have to say that you’re wrong, and that there is precedent for such things. Lots of precedent. And indeed, we will see very much more of the same in the months and years to come, as our government, under the thrall of these demonic Zionists and greed-consumed arms manufactures and ‘millennium’ zombies with their faces stuck in their social media obsessed with Caitlyn >>sigh<<

    anyways

  138. Hey JR,

    But, anyway, it goes like this: the U.S. authorities decide to drill this far-fetched multiple hijacking scenario and the terrorist actually decide to implement this far-out plot involving multiple hijackings. Completely independently, of course. I mean, this is already an amazing coincidence! The authorites decide to drill a far-fetched threat scenario and the terrorists decide to implement the same thing! Completely independently! But now, get this… by pure coincidence, the drill and the actual terrorist operation occur on the very same day! Completely independently! By pure coincidence!

    it sort of makes your mind spin

    these guys had Korans! So we know they’re terrorists!”

    Those Tsarnaev brothers, I remember hearing some garbage

    yea, and they were having a drill for a terrorist bombing right at the moment that the bombs went off, just like with 911

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/boston-marathon-bombing-happened-on-same-day-as-controlled-explosion-drill-by-boston-bomb-squad/5331505

    but it was all just an amazing coincidence!

    same with Sandy Hook, they were running an emergency drill for just such a tragedy, and then who knew?! A shooting takes place right while the drill is running! What are the odds?

    https://usahitman.com/shsasdc/

    I wonder what “Deduction” would say

  139. Since the Chinese Soccer page is on the fritz for me, my response is:

    No sense, Mr. Deduction. In basketball, we call it practice. Training is what the pros do in the off-season because they slack off and don’t practice. I was not saying that basketball practice does not exist (though Allen Iverson had his own ideas on the matter). But I sense that clarifying my point to you is not worth the effort. Do though ponder the qualification that only perfect practice makes perfect, which is akin to my point that most people who practice basketball will always suck. Many people who practice reading and writing suck too.

    Well in my case since the cricket news is on the blink, may I start by reminiscing about Paul Valery I believe, who said that poetry is not speech raised to the level of music, but music brought down to the level of speech. Many are capable of dishing out a mock sonnet, but fiction and poetry are alas the children of music, and it alone. No amount of practice will produce the genuine article, so therefore I desist from the urge to deliver any, being keenly aware of my musical ability, or rather the lack of it, from an early enough age.

    So, regarding the non-fiction of Jewish power, I feel my stand on safe ground to pen a paragraph. Or two.

    I have no quarrel with the weaker charge of dis-proportionate power, a simple enough count of souls in Senate, Congress, the Judiciary and Finance verifies the arithmetic – although on the last category, I should accept it only under protest on account of the pithy maxim, ‘beggars cannot be choosers’. The rest of them, I assert from a deep tribal intuition (and not a hint of irony) are the fruit (occasionally bitter) of struggles of the pathologically paranoid. Woody gets it right – and of course the inherited simoleon never hurts, does it? Or doesn’t it, since as I recall the Somervilles, the Forsythes, the D’Arcys (or even the Caseys?) had rather plenty of it from colonial adventures, but no one complains about that lot. Woody, gets it right again.

    The larger questions that loom in my mind, having just explained the provenance of power, have much to do with the deployment of that power, which, other than the support of the State by the elders (did I just jot that?) and the pavlovian rest, seems to me rather diffuse and often for the common good. I might note in this connection that I find at least tenuous and mostly contorted, constant attempts in these pages to sleuth the exclusive connection to jews, everything disagreeable, from all the ill-advised wars to one’s entrapment in unhappy marriages and the soliloquies of the mother-in-law.

    On a closing note I wonder if all I wrote above is fiction, simply the product of reading the UR for six months, for the world outside seems fairly non-plussed about the question of jews. :-)

  140. Many are capable of dishing out a mock sonnet, but fiction and poetry are alas the children of music, and it alone. No amount of practice will produce the genuine article

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-sXZTyodGH5c/UOw7yPBUhZI/AAAAAAAAAmg/6PKdn57-u48/s1600/Evan-Rachel-Wood-is-a-blonde-beauty-girl-23.jpg

    • Replies:
  141. So poetry is really gene expression in more ways than one.

  142. I wonder what “Deduction” would say

    I have to think that guy’s gone. I think he shot his wad. What a complete jerk!

    At one point, he said that he wouldn’t provide any evidence for the official 9/11 story because that would allow us to “pick holes in it”. That’s like the prosecution saying you committed a murder and saying they won’t provide any evidence because then the defense lawyers would be able to contest it! And then, after refusing to provide any evidence, he declares victory!

    His overall argument is like saying that if I tell you that I ate raw whale blubber this morning for breakfast, you must believe me, UNLESS you are able to say what I did have for breakfast! AND prove it, of course…

    Actually, it’s worse than that, because my eating raw whale blubber for breakfast is just highly unlikely, but, unlike the 9/11 story, does not violate any law of physics.

    But, regardless, the idea is that if you believe that I did not eat whale blubber for breakfast, you logically then MUST know what I did have for breakfast!!?

    And the funny thing is that this is the classic approach these “debunkers” continually use. Just a pathetic, laughable argument, really. Finally, the people who fall for this kind of argument must really have some sort of desperate need to be duped.

    So I think or friend (using the term very loosely) “Deduction” is gone.

    Or he could come up with some other bs. Like, what Shama does when he’s cornered and had no legitimate response to what you’re saying… What he does is just start this nonsense like “have you taken your meds” and so forth.

    In the same spot, Geokat, the smelly goat, what he does is he starts whining about “civility”. The guy gets caught in completely dishonest, deceptive tactics, and then you’re supposed to be nice to him. It’s like you catch somebody trying to sell you counterfeit goods and you get angry at him, and the swindler tries to turn the issue away from his attempt to swindle you, no, it’s about but your lack of civility to him! After he tried to cheat you!

    These people must be professional deceivers, I think so… But their game is pretty transparent for the most part. Granted, on this 9/11 topic, they’re playing a very very bad hand.

    Anybody who is taken in in by these people, I guess it can only be because they have some desperate psychological need to be duped. In fact, that, as far as I can see, is the main asset that the “debunkers” have, that they can leverage, people’s desperate, neurotic need to be duped. Aside from that, the evidence that the 9/11 official story is false is just overwhelming — well, like the official story on JFK and so on… You have to really want to believe it…

  143. “In contrast, relations between Orthodox Christians and Muslims have by and large been peaceful. The notable exception to this was the Ottoman Empire which has always viciously persecuted Orthodox Christianity, but that kind of behavior was always an Ottoman characteristic, not a Muslim one.”

    The Arab assaults on the Byzantine Empire? The Golden Horde? The Crimean Khanate? The Caucasus Muslims? Sorry but all Islamic groups have fought Orthodox Christianity when able to, not just the Ottomans.

  144. “Czar Nicholas II, who was an extremely pious Orthodox Christian and who has been glorified as a saint by the Russian Orthodox Church, personally chose the central location of what was then the biggest mosque in Europe – right in the middle of the then capital of Russia, Saint Petersburg.”

    Note how things developed for Nicholas and his regime thereafter.

  145. “the embrace of Islam as an integral part of Russia”

    The eventual consequence of such an embrace will be the embrace of Russia as a part of Islam.

  146. [It's far preferable not to clutter up a comment-thread with numerous short remarks, but instead to combine them into one or two much longer and more substantial ones.]

    “While on a dogmatic level Islam and Orthodoxy are fundamentally incompatible (Islam sees Christ as a man, Orthodoxy as Son of God and God Himself), on a cultural and social level there are no incompatibilities at all.”

    Islamic cultural and social reality is essentially Sharia law, the absence of which is not actual Islamic culture or society. It’s just a question of which school. None are however very compatible with Orthodox culture or society, shared opposition to Gay Pride marches notwithstanding.

  147. “the Ottomans used be the second worst enemy of Orthodox Christianity (after the Papacy, of course).”

    Absurd. The Papacy skirmished with Orthodox Christianity. The Ottomans almost destroyed it (as did the Arabs before), and Constantinople is still Turkish.

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 Information
Why?

 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 Subscribe to All The Saker Comments via RSS
Past
Classics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.