/

My Recent Interview on WILLIAM RAMSEY INVESTIGATES: Israel, the Temple Mount & Hamas…

Burning Blogger interview: William Ramsey Investigates

I was recently invited by William Ramsey to appear on his show, William Ramsey Investigates, for the second time.

On William’s podcast, we discussed Israel and the Middle East, the recent Gaza crisis and the plot against the King of Jordan. We also spoke about Israel’s links to Far Right groups and figureheads, including the likes of Tommy Robinson, as well as false-flag events like Christchurch and Sri Lanka and the strange links between perpetrators like Brenton Tarrant and Anders Breivik to both Zionism and the Masons.

 

 

The show can be heard or downloaded here and here (and on most other podcast platforms).

My previous interview with William Ramsey, on the Libya Conspiracy, can still be found here.

William is also an author, who has published several books, including Children of the Beast: Aleister Crowley’s Shadow Over Humanity and Prophet of Evil: Aleister Crowley, 9/11 & the New World Order.

His most recent book, Global Death Cult: The Order of Nine Angles, Atomwaffen & the Slaughter of the Innocents, can be purchased here – and is a fascinating read.

My thanks to William for the invite.

Also, for anyone who never heard the interview I did with Horizon Talk Radio recently (discussing the COVID pandemic, as well as 9/11 and the Lockerbie conspiracy), it can be found here.

 


Related articles:Why Israel Created Hamas‘, ‘The Al-Aqsa Controversy & the Plot Against Jordan‘, ‘Tommy Robinson – A Bullshit Psy-Op for Dummies‘, ‘The Christchurch Massacre – And the False-Flag Motion Machine‘, ‘Azov Battalion, White Jihad & the Return of the Nazis‘, ‘Seeds of Fascism: International Zionists, Right-Wing Populism & the Return to the 1930s‘…


 

S. Awan

Independent journalist. Pariah. Believer in human rights, human dignity and liberty. Musician. Substandard Jedi. All-round failure. And future ghost.

26 Comments

  1. Bless y sorry lol

    Go take a nap. You made me think too much and too many images have passed through my head.

    🙂

  2. S. Awan, i will answer you on the next two points that you raised because I cannot do it above.

    ‘Thank you Neilly. Your knowledge and frames of reference are always a great thing to see and to engage with. I actually believe that all of the ‘versions’ we have today of the major religions are imposters: that all of the religions were coopted or hijacked and redirected a long time ago – and continuing into the modern age.’

    ‘S. Awan
    says:
    2021-08-19 at 05:54

    I agree with you about sectarianism, Neilly. And it has been deliberately aggravated for divide and conquer purposes, first by the British and French and then by the Zionists and the various proxy powers. That’s why I’ve always said Arab Nationalism was the best direction.’

    And, that I don’t want you to change your mind.

    No, because it’s better when the person understands things by themselves. And besides, given the current system, I can have good wishes but the manipulators can deflect our intention as good as it is.

    There is a French author who is well known now, especially among the anti-new world order, those who oppose Zionism etc.

    He is not a Muslim at all, but not at all.

    But he wrote ‘Islam, the last bulwark against the new world order’ (by Mr Pierre Hillard)

    Certainly people who believe that Islam is terrorism, they will not understand any of this.

    In this case as much to say that terrorism was not born among Muslims.

    Those who believe that Muslims are all dumb, so they may not know they are out of their minds.

    Above all, they are ignorant of the history and history of the 3 different faiths, ancient civilizations and the present world.

    But I won’t go into detail.

    Just that the 3 monotheistic religions have served and serve greatly in this world. Already this avoids bending to the laws of men thirsty for power, or following bad interpretations under a cleric.

    The cleric can take different forms even a statute. lol

    (They can put false clerics to tarnish a FAITH, they have done it many times)

    And, the last Faith with a book has the advantage of still having a majority that does not follow a cleric.

    Their cleric is the creator and the creator leave them freer over many things in their minds and movements than the laws of treacherous, power-hungry, or corrupt men.

    etc.

    (I jump)

    Question:

    If the West can no longer limit the growing excesses of Zionism, who can do it? And on the spot in the region, where the entity manifested itself under a so-called democratic state? (Because at some point or another the West will not be able to feed it any more, unless it sells its own people. Some are already doing so.)

    If Jews have even fled this country and denounce it and the West does not even listen to them. Fail to defend them against the beast who even wants to tear away their faith, their identity. Who can do it?

    Jews and Muslims have lived for centuries in the same territory without a problem (others who say they speak for one or the other and say the opposite are impostors).

    Who is going to do a little or a lot of justice to avoid the voracious whims of this lobby?

    A people who are animated by justice, truth and who have full faith in this will be able to restore justice in the Middle East and for the world. You have to have FAITH and move forward as if they were a body.

    And because they have faith in numbers in the same direction. Who has the definition of this?

    What people in the west have this?

    Yet when they said they (west, you can put Russia in ) were going to do justice, they fed the beast, they sowed more mess and supported injustice. It’s getting worse and worse and on lies.

    (There they think of vaccinating their neighbor in numbers, or fight to decide to impose their own vaccination on their neighbor who wants to remain free to choose. They want to vaccinate their children? A world which kills its own children cannot claim to preserve the life).

    And the lobby has fun watching, watching and mounting hatred.

    Many will beg to be saved from this foul beast. Who’s gonna do it? Those who come to terms with them or sell themselves to them?)

    If the billions of Muslims were as horrible as the West claims, but then they would have been blown up all over the place.

    Maybe it takes simple people to live in peace in this world and with respect for its difference.

    And, they did not start this global mess.

    Good now. I wish good luck to many people who have the wrong enemies and are discovering the true face of the enemy. He wasn’t that far.

    There are those who are in a hurry to hold the vaccination camps. What to say.

    And besides, I must resist with them and help as I can.

    Blee y S. Awan

    PS: Saddam, Nacer were nationalists.

    • Thanks for the well thought out comment. I agree that most or all of the hatred and sectarianism going on today – both in the West and in the Middle East – has all been manufactured and deliberately nurtured. I wish that people would just refuse to participate.

  3. By the way my earthling friend, I forgot to mention, your voice in the recorded interviews as podcasts is not very clear. So it’s not like your own audio recordings that you upload to youtube. Your voice is louder and clearer in your own videos no doubt. But in other interview podcast files, your voice sounds weaker. Here, in some places I listened twice. I think you should speak a little louder in these recordings of inteviews. Of course, that’s my humble opinion. I know also, we, non-native English speakers like me are expecting a David Bowie tone and accent from every British, right, haha!

    • Yeah, I know I don’t have a very loud speaking voice: I’ve always been soft-spoken. I’ll try to shout next time. Maybe I could use a Darth Vader voice synthesiser 🙂

      • Lol, I liked your voice me.

        oh my G.

        ‘a Darth Vader voice synthesiser ‘

        lol

        Keep your voice, it is trippy with your articles of course.

        (And that’s when I’m going to hide.)

        See you soon

  4. Tk y

    Good job

    I am impressed. (nice voice)

    It’s a subject that interests me a lot.

    https://hiddenluciferians.freemindaily.com/category/organisation-terroriste-et-occultisme

    (I reorganize the sections. I have been censored a lot on the subject and on Shiism which is linked by its origin on points and those who manipulate dogmas.)

    It is difficult to speak openly in France about this.

    In addition I do not live in France now, and where I am I have more to facilitate to speak about the subject.

    In any case, I will listen to your interview again to better understand what you have shared.

    Merci

    • Thank you Neilly. I would also be very interested to see your views on Shiism, which is something I have not gone into much. I’ve explored Wahhabism and Zionism at great length, but not Shiism so much.

      • I update my articles and the links on the subject.

        And I will get back to you.

        When I first started I made montage videos to explain things.

        My montages I made them in a metaphorical form etc. (Young and I needed to shout things. It was a little, for people of the sensational or too strange. It was double-edged.)

        https://hiddenluciferians.freemindaily.com/sommaire-chiisme-dogme-subversif

        The videos got a lot of attention and people started to care about the topic. Doubt has been installed and people have changed.

        Now there are more people talking about this kind of subject.

        But I also had threatening holdouts.

        I was not surprised to find out who were the ones who blew up my work and who peddle the fake.

        Since then, I have better control my emotions and I denounce differently.

        Having said that, who would have said (before) for a while that an American did on the subject like you, worrying about the vision or the feelings of others (supposedly enemy) .

        Uhm

        I have a hard time expressing things sometimes, maybe that’s why I started in a weird way.

        Bless y

        • Thanks Neilly. You’ve been doing very good work, from what I could see. If you ever want to communicate with me privately – where you might be able to say things you’re not comfortable saying in the public comments section – feel free to contact me via the ‘CONTACT’ page on the site. That will send your message to my email address. Thanks anyway.

          • Sorry, I was so taken these days. There are so many disturbing things going on.
            I missed your articles (that soft, calm side of explaining facts; even if there is a burning deep).

            In short.
            Regarding Shiism.

            It is a sect which was made like Wahhabism to sow discord, social subversions and division.

            Then, they surely intended to use it as they did to manipulate the message of ‘Jesus’ (which was not called Christianity), to divide people through time and lose them in meanders of sectarian interpretations and lead or refer them to follow their dystopian cause.

            It is important to understand, why there is a heated debate on the issue of Sunnis and Shiites.

            Certain historical events are deliberately misinterpreted by Shiite propagandists and their supporters.

            The Shiite movement has had an impact on the history of the Muslim world and others.

            Indeed, this sect is one of the centerpieces in the globalists’ ploy.
            Ibn Saba tried to weaken the Muslims from within by creating the Shiite sect.

            He was a Jewish Kabbalist rabbi falsely ‘converted’ to Islam, in order to found the Shiite sect.

            Often modern Shia propagandists will deny the existence of Abdullah ibn Saba out of embarrassment.

            However, its existence is well known and documented.

            It has been recognized by their classical Shiite authors, Sunni scholars and even non-Muslim historians.

            Moreover, the Jewish encyclopedia confirms that the founder of Shiism is this Yemeni Jew.

            Throughout its turbulent history, the Sabaites, the ancestors of today’s Shiites, have attempted to fuel unrest, divisions and rivalries within the Muslim community (and not just them).

            Why?

            Ahmadinejad’s confession is officially that of Shiism [more precisely, that of the Chia Rafidi movement. It is also called Twelver Shiism].

            It is a cult made by a Kabbalist Jew, falsely converted to Islam and steeped in esotericism.

            In view of the world situation, the proselytism of Shiism, and to prevent unfortunate and unfortunate consequences; we are entitled to ask questions.

            Muslims (thinkers, scholars etc.) were working and trying to correct their deviations or to face their deviations.

            But some Britons, Americans, and the inomable lobby gave them their chance, helped as they helped the Wahhabis to have a power of political desire in a country (especially).

            Truly a sectarian ideological dogma at the top of a political system does not need an outside entity to kill social values ​​and life in a country.

            And the people are kept under control, unable to defend their rights or those of their neighbors. Just survival.

            Regarding the dictatorship in Iran, the politicians are, mainly, crypto-Jews, freemasons, or too corrupt.

            And, they follow the rules of the ‘Globalist Elitists’.

            In the sense, that Shiism serves a globalist messianic agenda, from the foundations of this cult.

            Shiism is a cult that is used for geopolitical strategy and more.

            There are Iranians who fight against this cult. They have sites online that are sometimes a bit hard for ordinary people to read.

            And And we can feel a worry as for Muslims with the political cult of Wahhabism or the Saudis.

            I would come back to write.

            Sorry again for the late reply.

            These days, their global strategy is causing far-reaching consequences in countries.

            Bless y

            •:**:•

          • Thank you Neilly. Your knowledge and frames of reference are always a great thing to see and to engage with. I actually believe that all of the ‘versions’ we have today of the major religions are imposters: that all of the religions were coopted or hijacked and redirected a long time ago – and continuing into the modern age.

        • (pre-edit: My reply is not related with this comment but your next one. I’ve made my reply here to your comment below under, because of there isn’t seen a reply section on that.)

          “Indeed, this sect(Shiism) is one of the centerpieces in the globalists’ ploy.” This claim is incriminating.

          Almost every sect in Islam is in a position to be someone’s and/or globalists’ toy in some way. As a result, almost all of them have come to the position of prioritizing sect over religion. In reality, all conflicts take place over and based on sectarian divisions since this. There is only one book, Quran in the middle (in reality, all religious people’ practicing should be based on it) but due to many historical and practical reasons, it is interpreted and applied over many sects.

          And in fact, Wahhabism tops the rankings when it comes to the status of being a globalist toy. But when you commented on it here, you simply said, “But some Britons, Americans, and the inomable lobby gave them their chance, helped as they helped the Wahhabis to have a power of political desire in a country (especially),” by making a cursory comment, you are softening the assessment. You are not perspective.

          In their historical development, if you use the right sources, and as these open sources reveal, you will see the fact that the Wahhabis are in close contact with the globalists, periodically and on an ongoing basis. Starting almost 50 years after its emergence. In other words, Wahhabism, a sect that spent 6/7 of its existence in close relations with the British, then the Americans and others, is in a leading position in being the toy of the globalists.

          I see obvious confusion and irrationality in your comments here.

          • hi Migarium

            Ok, you can interpret this as having put a little softness when I wrote:

            ‘“But some Britons, Americans, and the inomable lobby gave them their chance, helped as they helped the Wahhabis to have a power of political desire in a country (especially),”’

            And to think that I was known not to put on gloves when I touched their sects (and other things).

            You might be right, I softened up a bit.

            But I am going to leave you with one of my sites which relates particularly to them.

            https://hiddenluciferians.freemindaily.com

            For this:

            ‘the Wahhabis are in close contact with the globalists’

            Yes I am talking about it on I think two of my sites on articles.

            But I still thought to write things as soon as I passed by there. (oups)

            You know for me I think like some Muslims.

            They are the lifting of the devil’s horn (well this requires an explanation but I’ll make it short).

            Regarding being the toys of the globalists.

            It does not seem to me to have said the contrary.

            Having said that, they are all toys for their own loss.

            It’s a shame that there are some who follow them and who will lose their lives and souls with them.

            A certain category of Shiites will be raptors at the boot of the unspeakable lobby.

            That said, normal their heads, most of them are crypto-zion-kabbalo perverts of crazy.

            Small note:

            Generations later, these Saba’ites joined the various Shiite sects that we know today:

            The Druze, Bohras, Nizaris, Zaydis, Jarudis, Sulaymanis, Butris, Ismaéliens, Kaysaniyyas, Qaddahiyyas, Ghullat, Aga Khanis, Ithna Asharis, Usoolis, Akhbaris, Shaykis, .. (32 in all…).

            They can be classified into three categories: the Extremists (ghâliyah), the Zaydits (zaydiyyah) and the Râfidites (râfidah).

            You know who distinguished these sects.

            Don’t think about it, they are not Wahhabis.

            But Muslims (neither Shiites nor any of their different sects, nor Wahhabis).

            It is possible that many people do not know what a Muslim is.

            But for now they are in a delicate situation like many others in this world.

            For:

            ‘Almost every sect in Islam’

            In reality, they are not sects of Islam.

            But hey must believe that their followers like to qualify as belonging to Islam.

            Maybe it’s fashionable.

            That said in their everyday life, not all of their followers apply all of their precepts.

            I don’t think they all practice legalized prostitution on their wives, for example.

            And I’m sure there are some who pretend to belong to their sect.

            Usually those who do awful deeds on behalf of a cult and show themselves off, they get paid well for doing it.

            The populace do not even know why this is falling on their heads.

            I don’t know if I answered correctly but it was a pleasure.

            Thank you

          • Another precision to be clearer

            When i wrote this:

            Of course, we are going to have public opinion in the UK or the US, or in other countries who will cry out for their destruction, who will discriminate against them when they do not even know that they are closer to their political power. respective of the faith of Muslims.

            I reformulate

            Those who decide on these sects are more distant from Islam and closer to the heads who decide in the West the fate of their own populace.

            😉

        • Yes, I’ve commented based on what I’ve read. It seemed to be softened to me. What I see here in general is that you are showing Shiism as the most harmful focal point within Islam.

          What I generally oppose is discrimination. As an atheist and rationalist, I cannot use a definition such as crypto-zion-kabbalo, nor I can generalize any group of people because they belong to a sect or religion. There are bad people and good people in every sect. If one or two of them is judged as “this sect is very bad” by generalizing, there is no end to it. It is already obvious that it did not come to end.

          Thanks for explaining yourself.

          • Hi Migarium

            Alors, je reviens sur ce point:

            ‘I cannot use a definition such as crypto-zion-kabbalo, nor I can generalize any group of people because they belong to a sect or religion.’

            Yes it comes down to what I specified:

            ‘That said in their everyday life, not all of their followers apply all of their precepts.

            I don’t think they all practice legalized prostitution on their wives, for example.

            And I’m sure there are some who pretend to belong to their sect.

            Usually those who do awful deeds on behalf of a cult and show themselves off, they get paid well for doing it. …’

            ‘pretend’

            Yes it comes down to what I specified:

            That said, Shiites or Wahhabis imply that they are legitimate members of the Muslim community.

            There is no Shiite school affiliated with Islam.

            It is heads of the West that have sharpened them.

            So we can ask questions. (oups)

            However, Westerners, in general, are less nice when it comes to discriminating against people of a faith, like Islam (or others).

            Then, a little softer in their economic affair with Shiite and Wahhabite heads. But not with the Muslims of the lower classes. Finally I understand myself. uhm

            For:

            ‘Shiism as the most harmful focal point within Islam.’

            No there are their Wahhabi brothers too.

            Then in the Shiites it is especially it seems to me the rafidi ‘(or follower of the twelfth imam) who are very much on horseback on their precepts.

            They form the upper ‘class’ who promote this trend in Iran’s political power, for example.

            They caused a lot of damage.

            However, Muslims (yes because there are some in Iran) are rather patient and try to survive (or live outside). (The Shiites who are well subject to decision-making power have not been gentle with them. Tortures and executions etc.)

            Those who always try to demonize them and make them guilty of all their evils are not Muslims. It seems to me.

            But moreover, it is their acolytes (or their equivalent) the innumerable lobby who decide almost all political directions in the United States for example. Or the British heads who gave the chance (no they promoted) this lobby of global shit. (Sorry I’m trying to be nice. Don’t know you well, so I’m trying to calm the bomb that’s sleeping inside me).

            Everything is in appearance and nothing in is true in substance.

            In fact, I have a lot more to say on the subject of Shiism and Wahhabism.

            Ah don’t worry, the big-headed globalists aren’t planning to get rid of them yet (they are still useful to them, sometimes (or often) they even have their agents among them).

            Of course, we are going to have public opinion in the UK or the US, or in other countries who will cry out for their destruction, who will discriminate against them when they do not even know that they are closer to their political power. respective of the faith of Muslims (oups)

            Then Muslims are not that bad.They cannot convert people if they are already in their grave. lol (sorry). Indeed, for them it is the creator who guides.

            For me, I’m just a free spirit. I will suggest a discussion with them. Anyway, it will be hard to discuss with the innumerable lobby, the CIA and the services of the disorder which promote their respective sect in Iran or in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.

            Already it’s hard to discuss with one of their followers. And in general the little bawlers just rehash on a chair stupid rules from a madhouse (He just destroys his own values, well if he has any).

            Sometimes it is easier to argue with an ‘atheist and rationalist’. Finally, sometimes there are some who panic and suddenly quit. They are feared in the face of their ignorance or the difference of others. But that’s not your case, I think. I have Faith and it respects my freedom of thought than others.

            To come back to these sects like Shiism.

            They don’t need other people to discriminate against them. They do it so well. A bit like the Kabbalo-Talmudized-Zionist evangelists in the United States.

            The unspeakable lobby must have fun in front of all these sacrifices.

            Just a quick note:

            The Wahhabis (high heads) and the Shiites (high heads promoting the twelfth imam to keep their followers under their yoke and that they continue to finance their own pockets) are closely linked by their origin (their founders toiled for the same ideology In the end, they work for the same cause).

            Then in Wahhabism, in its development, there was an infusion of ideas from the Shiite sect.

            Politically

            The regime in Iran itself was also provoked by Western collaborators; which were Muslim Brotherhood living in this country.

            Which culminated in the establishment of leader Ayatollah Khomeini as a British agent.

            (Before)

            Fleeing members of the Muslim Brotherhood from Egypt shuttled between CIA allies and Saudi Arabia.

            ‘The beating of the Muslim Brotherhood organizers, who were arrested, revealed that the organization was completely penetrated from above, by the British, the Americans, the French and Soviet intelligence services; which any of them could actively use or blow up at their convenience. ‘

            https://hiddenluciferians.freemindaily.com/2016/06/wahhabisme-et-la-conspiration-occulte.html

            (Please note that English is not my first language. I hope I answered correctly.)

            With pleasure.

            Merci

          • ‘Alors, je reviens sur ce point’

            So, I come back to this point (I wanted to write, sorry)

          • Another precision to be clearer

            When i wrote this:

            Of course, we are going to have public opinion in the UK or the US, or in other countries who will cry out for their destruction, who will discriminate against them when they do not even know that they are closer to their political power. respective of the faith of Muslims.

            I reformulate

            Those who decide on these sects are more distant from Islam and closer to the heads who decide in the West the fate of their own populace.

            😉

        • “Yes it comes down to what I specified:
          ‘That said in their everyday life, not all of their followers apply all of their precepts.'”

          I spoke with the conclusion that I deduced from what you told in general view. Since I saw a dominant creating “the most harmful focal point within Islam” on Shiism in your writings (and it seems Wahhabism too with the examples you gave later,) next to the other sects, I commented in this way.

          If you look at what you wrote, you can see after you pushed them corner so far, by saying “‘That said in their everyday life, not all of their followers apply all of their precepts.”, so to make a short note, unfortunately, is not felt strongly in all of your writings.

          Why am I telling you all this? Because I know that I am good at writing and have a good understanding of how what I read can evolve on its way, and/or what can be expected from the value of what I read; these’re tried and tested with experience. I saw some confusions in your commnents. You’re obviously very excited about this subject. The excitement is actually a good thing when it’s focused on a job, but I saw obvious confusion. So, you want to tell something, and you know some things obviously, but you’re presenting a very complex menu to an internet reader. Maybe calmer, I think it would be much healthier if you classify what you want to convey under a certain graphic and write accordingly. These are only my humble opinion to you.

          In this context, it is fact that I did not argue with you from the very beginning, since I am not that excited about this subject, and because I do not enter into discussions on subjects that I know my knowledge is not enough. I’ve just criticized based on my perception what you wrote created on my mind.

          Lastly, I’d like to state that I am in favor of treating everyone equally. If we criticize a sect or more than one sect and make it more of a focus than others, we would label everyone who is a member of that sect. This already leads to the worsening of the Middle East in particular. Of course, I am not saying that something wrong will not be told. On the contrary, it must be told, and it should be explained in particular so that humanity can get better. But in general, I think that definitions that can put everyone under a certain title should be avoided and look from broad perspective.

          Thank you for your explaning also.

          • Hi again Migarium

            ‘so to make a short note, unfortunately, is not felt strongly in all of your writings.’

            In reality, I mainly denounce the ideology of these sects because I think that is what hurts the most. And other sects too. Especially if they have a very bad origin and finitude on other lives (often manipulated for political, social issues etc.)

            Afterwards everyone is free to go where they want.

            Then, when I distinguish in real life people from this or that sectarian branch (or if he tells me so), I do not reject him, nor stigmatize him and sometimes I speak with them. I am curious. if they become sticky. I flee lol

            If not on the net sometimes they can be boring and not nice. There were some that happened for this or that sect but they were not. it was a few Zionists who fueled hatred or other hate groups. (At that time, they propspected on social networks, videos etc. to influence the opinion of French)

            ‘I know that I am good at writing and have a good understanding of how what I read can evolve on its way, and/or what can be expected from the value of what I read’

            Oui, it’s true.

            ‘I am good at writing’

            It’s good I like being corrected and learning. No problem.

            ‘You’re obviously very excited about this subject. The excitement is actually a good thing when it’s focused on a job, but I saw obvious confusion.’

            I don’t know if I’m enthusiastic or excited about the subject.

            Maybe I answer in a sometimes sarcastic or ironic way. Or maybe there is pain on the points. Seen or experienced things.

            But let’s leave that.

            ‘Lastly, I’d like to state that I am in favor of treating everyone equally. If we criticize a sect or more than one sect and make it more of a focus than others, we would label everyone who is a member of that sect. ‘

            Sects are known and identifiable. The others are not. And in general they do not engage in political manipulation (lies and dehumanization etc.)

            We should not classify in sects what are not. It would harm people who have nothing to do with them. they cannot all be equal. Because sects like Wahhabism, Shiism (some more than others), and others produce unfortunate and sad consequences socially and in life.

            These sects of manipulation of their ideology cannot endure as a true faith (they are not sitting on anything, wind, lies, crimes etc.). It’s impossible. So they fabricate events or false facts to last over time. The heart cannot love them (in general, or you have to be twisted).

            I think we have the same intention in the end. Just that we say it differently.

            ‘This already leads to the worsening of the Middle East in particular.’

            Without these sects and the lobby of abomination and lamentation, the Middle East would be much better.

            Assures you.

            Anyway, that’s not their goal.

            Tk y Migarium

            Bless y

          • I agree with you about sectarianism, Neilly. And it has been deliberately aggravated for divide and conquer purposes, first by the British and French and then by the Zionists and the various proxy powers. That’s why I’ve always said Arab Nationalism was the best direction.

  5. Nice interview, thanks for sharing my earthling friend.

    You asked a few questions in the interview, in accordance with the explanation of the subject. For example, there was a question like why didn’t the British keep their promise to King Faisal.

    I think the British did not promise him, that is, as far as I know at least not in writing. And it was clear beforehand that today’s Saudi Arabia would go to the Saudi family.

    The Saud family, is a family from the Aneze (or El-Aneze) tribe, is a tribe that has spread to many places in Arabia from Syria to Iraq. The British signed a treaty with the chief of the Aneze tribe, Fahd Ibn Haz’al, in 1917. You can find it in the archives. With this treaty, the Aneze tribe declared that they would remain loyal to Britain. However, the situation was not the same for King Faisal. He was a pro pan-arabism. A united Arab world was in favor of a combination of Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and present-day Arabia. However, since Gertrude Bell knew that this aim of hers was very contrary to the British idea of ​​a middle east drawn with a ruler, both she and Lawrence reported all information about Faisal to England. Of course, British waited until the appropriate time as usual, with a use and throwaway policy.

    On the other hand, I think Faisal was a character who lived in the dreamland world, wanted the impossible and was unaware to be used. The united Arab world he wanted was impossible. However, he was a person who did not have the political foresight to see what kind of ambition he has inside.

    Faisal’s father, Hussein Bin Ali, was also living in the same dream which to unite Arabs under the same roof. His dreams were rewarded with the golds that Lawrence had delivered to him from England, and the dividing the territory into his children, including King Abdullah of Jordan. These families (Hussein Bin Ali and Saud family) was actually a family that united with the British against the Ottomans at that time and caused tens of thousands of Turkish soldiers and civil Turks to die in the Arabian cities and deserts with brutally and treacherously.

    It’s brutal because over 3700 Turkish civilians were beheaded overnight in Baghdad alone, on Faisal’s orders. Not counting other cities. Arab historians of the period, even Arab poets, proudly talk about tens of thousands of Turks whose heads were cut off. This is also in the Ottoman archives, including the Arab archives. (between 1914-1918). According to sane western historians, the blood-bathed streets and the smell of dead Turks pervades the cities, and the brutality was unbelievable. Their orders was the “kill all Turks” by their commanders and Lawrance. Even history also records that Lawrence said frantically to the Arabs:
    “The best among you is the one who will kill the most Turks! You will not take a prisoner. You will kill anyone who wants to surrender!”
    For example, in September 1918, a group led by Lawrence, during the retreat of the Turks from Tafas, attacked the train car in Dera, which fulled with sick and injured soldiers, and killed all of them.

    It is treacherous because, for example, during the Tripoli War, the Arabs who fought alongside the Turks at the front changed sides overnight and went to the other side. Same happened at the others front too.

    Also current King Abdullah 2’s mother is also English. His father’s first wife, Queen Dina, was of Circassian origin and was born in Istanbul. I guess these are explaning why Abdullah 2 feels to connect with western. Also, the fact that they are descended from the prophet Muhammad is parallel to the belief that the Hashemites are descendants of the prophets. As far as I know, there is no recorded document about this.

    • Thanks for listening, my friend: and thanks for providing such a detailed and learned comment here. Your breadth of knowledge is always impressive: and anyone who knows figures like Lawrence and Gertrude Bell in this day and age is someone I want to be having conversations with.
      In terms of Faisal living in a dreamland, I accept that he was maybe being overly trusting and overly optimistic: but the idea of pan-Arabism itself wasn’t all too unrealistic. It was really what people like Faisal envisioned when they joined the Arab Revolt. And much later Arab leaders, like Gaddafi and Nasser, seemed also to have an interest in pan-Arab ideas. In terms of WWI, the pan-Arab ideal was certainly seen as preferable to the French/British plan of carving up the Arab world into small states and creating all of these sectarian problems.
      In terms of the Arab slaughter of Turks in those incidents, especially Dera – yes, these are well documented war crimes. In war, I guess, these things happen (but shouldn’t): in Lawrence’s account of Dera, their actions were supposedly provoked by Turkish troops having slaughtered civilians in an Arab village. There was also an existing argument that the Arabs – because they didn’t belong to a nation and were therefore not seen as having the same status as other combatants – were not being afforded the rights of the Geneva Conventions against things like torture; whereas in much of the war, the Turkish soldiers were being afforded those rights by the Arabs (wherever the British were able to make sure of it). Accounts of war are always tricky – there’s always two sides and there’s always a bias in how those events are remembered or recorded. We could look, for example, at how differently opposing nations or societies view something like the Armenian Genocide.
      The most unfortunate thing about WWI was that it was a pointless war. Just lots and lots of death and suffering, for no real purpose.

      • Thank you but in fact, my knowledge of the first world war is limited to only certain fronts and events after. I have always been more interested in the second world war, because firstly, the air forces and warplanes of the warring parties, and secondly, both the past of the Soviets and the birth of socialism are my primary interests. Of course, there’s also the of mysterious and dark pasts of maybe the worst villains in world history, Hitler and the Nazis. So what I’m saying is that I’m probably not as knowledgeable on this subject as you are, my friend. Despite my less knowledge on this subject, perhaps my greatest luck is to know which sources I should read, and of course to be able to compare the correct sources of the official records of the east (Turkey, todays and past Ottoman era, Russia, todays and both tzarist and Soviet era) with the propagandist historiography of the west.

        In this context, “Accounts of war are always tricky – there’s always two sides and there’s always a bias in how those events are remembered or recorded.” I agree with the truth of your words. Concrete evidence is needed to avoid acting with prejudice. For me, frontline reports during the war are the most important tangible evidence. In other words, a British officer, a Russian officer, a Turkish officer and others speak/tell the truth in their correspondence within the front. Since the subject is opened from Lawrence, who was a secret officer of the British intelligence with the most optimistic point of view, as in the movie that was written by his memoirs, caused a lot of incomplete and wrong information to circulate, including the attack in Deraa, or about the Turkish officer harassing him. What he told was not true. On that train were soldiers who had retreated and were all wounded and or sick; or he never crossed paths with the highest administrative military chief in the region, whom he said harassed him, because the highest administrative chief of the time, Hacim Muhittin Bey, was not there at that time. And the raid on the train in Dera, as you emphasized, “their actions were “-supposedly-” provoked by Turkish troops having slaughtered civilians in an Arab village”.

        The place mentioned, Tafas, write down in history as the Turks killed about 250 people in an Arab village, as you said. This is correct information, so Turkish records write the same way. And it is horrible, of course. But I too think it’s supposedly that Lawrence’s Arab troops were affected by this massacre and made a raid to Turks. Because there are records that Turks were slaughtered before this massacres. This whole front was actually referred to as the Palestinian front, when 1914 began. That is the area where Tafas and Dera are located. However, with the withdrawal of the German and Turkish forces in years(4 years long), the front gradually shrank towards the north and took different names. At the begining, there were 5 army corps there, formed by German and mostly Turkish forces. The total of the 5 Army Corps were named the Lightning Army Group, led by German General Otto Liman Von Sanders. The Tafas and Dera events had also happened during of the Battle of Nablus on this front.

        After 4 years of wars on the Palestinian front, when it came to the battle of Nablus, only 1.5 of these army corps, each of which consisted of three divisions, had remained. If we take into account that each division had 15 thousand people, there were about 70 thousand of the 225 thousand mostly Turkish soldiers stayed alive after 4 years only in this front. Being under the bombardment of air and ground forces not only by the British, but also by the French, Turkish forces were exposed to the attacks by the Arabs, who saw this as an opportunity. After the Hejaz railway was blown up and the Turkish troops began to retreat, they were attacked by the Arab tribes on all retreat paths. Just before passing through Tafas, for example, about 700 Turks had been killed by Arabs on the road the day before. When they entered Tafas, the people of Tafas attacked to Turks, nearly 50 Turks were killed, and it was very sad that the Turks attacked the civilian people of Tafas there in return. Turkish wounded soldiers were killed as a result of the attack in the famous Dera train incident just one day later after Tafas. There is another similar one, and two days later, Turks were killed in Dera again, this time at the station, about 1500 of wounded turkish soldiers were killed before the train left. Western sources do not tell this second one, probably they think that one is sufficient.

        After all (I know my comment extended, sorry), the wars are totaly loss for ordinary people, peoples, but for the leaders, it’s money, new markets and gaining power. And for this money, new markets, to gain power, the leaders organize campaigns with emotional sauce to the peoples. In fact, it has no emotional side for those at the front or civilian populations in war zones; there are only traumas, terror and death for them. Whenever war pilots, war ship captains, tank drivers or etc, say “no, I am not following this order,” maybe then everything will be different.

        In addition, I still think the issue of pan-Arabism is unrealistic. In fact, today’s civil wars, the use of sects so much, the understanding of sects and sectarianism in the Arab world, compared to the past, strengthens this view for me. As you mentioned, Gaddafi and Nasser acted with the idea of pan-arabism, but their difference was that they wanted to make a renaissance to pan-arabism and build it with socialism. The Ba’ath was also based on this idea. Contrary to them, Faisal had a view centered on Islamic solidarity for pan-arabism. Perhaps because Nasser and Gaddafi and others saw later that an Arab world unification within the Islamic framework would be difficult, and also with other influences of the period, they embarked on this path. However, this geography, namely the Middle East, is a place where identities are truly defined by religious identity. When you meet someone in one of these countries, you can infer that “he is a member of that sect” from his clothes, the way he speaks or etc. In recent years, borders have become more clear between the sects as almost every sect lives within itself without mixing with others. I’m not just talking about Shiites, Sunni and Alevis here. They also have dozens of sub-branches. Even within themselves, they are divided into dozens of pieces.

        Of course, the idea of a pan-Arabism integrated with socialism was the most developed model for that period. Looking from this era, I can easily say that it was a dream, but for that period, it was probably the best for the period. But as I said, I’m talking about the total process of all of them up to now. Ba’ath’s mistakes can be shaped primarily as the revival of this duty to the Assad family in Syria, or Saddam’s actions in Iraq. For example, a friend of mine, whose opinion on Syria I care about and who stayed in Syria for a time, said before the civil war: There is a proverb used in Syria “the one gets up early found a coup d’état first in Syria.” So, the Assad family made Syria today’s shape. Which also we know what Saddam done in Iraq. I am putting Gaddafi in different place from these, because he was different with actions and ideas. Were these mistakes predictable at that time? Most likely not, it was unpredictable from the inside of the region. However, from the outside, leaders such as Lenin and Ataturk who totaly supported the Arabs independence against western imperialism and, with different expressions and reasons, stated that the unification of the Arab world in the center of Arab nationalism and religion at that time was a distant idea. Obviously, these views were not taken into account from inside.

        • Thank you, my friend, for such a thought-out and detailed comment again. As the famous US General Smedley Butler once wrote: ‘War is a racket’. All about the money and the hegemony. War brings out the worst in human nature – as illustrated by these types of events, like the Arabs slaughtering Turkish prisoners or the Turk attack on the Arab village, etc. I’m glad you also separated Gaddafi a bit from the other pan-Arabists: I think Gaddafi was practising at least a *type* of Socialism, but customised to suit the Libyan society and economy.

Leave a Reply