The Victory Hour Aug 17, 2013

Alexander from Russia joins the show for a fascinating look at past and current events.

Egypt tears itself apart amid the pending Israeli seizure of the Suez Canal.

What will Russia’s next chess move be?

Also covered is the inspiring modern citizen/soldier’s tale of the defeat inflicted on Israeli terrorists crossing into Lebanon on August 6, 2013.

Gather round your comrades for a show not to be missed!

Download Here


  1. #1 by bigcree1 on 08/18/2013 - 9:34

    Hey fellows, you’re such a damn good listen I just had to tune in and will definitely come back to listen again as the ground you are covering is sooo very interestin and informative! The history of the Cossacks and doings in Egypt, Syria & Lebanon. The fact that the highly stupid IOF got their backsides handed to them in 2006, and their coming back for seconds recently with what they called ‘Nocturnal operations’. They were as max said ‘Committing terror’ AGAIN! But this time were expected by Hizbollah!! Hehehehe! The blood trail in fact had israel’s DNA all over it! Heheh! Stupid effers never learn! I do though with every stellar broadcast. Love it! Keep it coming Max and Alexander! You are getting some real traction here as the listeners are increasing by the numbers. Looks like even our common enemy is tuning in. MARKED UP with FIVE STARS for my part and I hope our friends & allies will do likeWISE! Kudos guys! You’re entertaining and educational conversation is a wonderful thing.

  2. #2 by bigcree1 on 08/18/2013 - 9:34

    TUT Readers it appears we have Flaggers/Trolls marking this Audio down at the top. PLEASE MARK it up with FIVE STARS!!!

  3. #3 by Dante Ardenz on 08/18/2013 - 9:34

    Take them on ! What a pleasure to hear FREEDOM ! Taking on the dam Jews, who tell us how to think, what to buy,and how to feel 24/7. I see where the GREATEST STORY NEVER TOLD on You Tube is going Viral ! 148.000 on one channel alone.. War Bruna has plenty too.. Subscribe there and link UGLY TRUTH. David Irving Action Report.Com. Great Tomato Rense.Com.etc.. Working together,we spread the word…make the Jews work at this .. We are rattling our chains…

  4. #4 by Ingrid B on 08/18/2013 - 9:34

    A Russian protectorate for Palestine, sounds wonderful..

    Thanks guys for the laughs, “anti-semitic rocks”, loved it. It does good to be able to laugh at the bozos who think they are sooooooooo fearsome. We certainly took the wind out of Ira`s sails a week or so ago..

    Cudos to Egeria, for pointing out the real agenda behind the bloody upheaval in Egypt, and yes, Max, the Egyptian people need to see their so-called “military” for what they are, genocidal maniacs, killing unarmed muslim civilians at the behest of their masters, which reduces them to bloodthirsty slaves..

  5. #5 by lolathecur on 08/18/2013 - 9:34

    Ira….what an assclown! You know you are doing something right when these paid megaphonies start paying attention to you. Thanks for another great, informative show guys.

  6. #6 by avenzoar on 08/18/2013 - 9:34

    With all due respect to guest Alexander, I mention below a few well known of historical points regarding Russia, and on the “Arab Caliphate” and views of sheikh Imran Hosein.

    Russia was as much a spolier as the Western powers (Britain, France, and Austria) in dismantling Ottoman caliphate (which was the last Islamic caliphate). Neither powers had any interest in Muslim (Arab or non-Arab) self rule of their regions, and Russia had eye on Jerusalem / Palestine long before WW1 or 1917, see below timeline from Muslim History by Dr. A. Zahoor (his web site,

    1852: Russia demanded guardianship of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, Ottoman Turkey

    1877-78: Dostoyevsky suggests that Russians should conquer Istanbul (Constantinople). This is the period of Russo-Turkish war in which Russia had captured Adrianople (areas west of Instanbul in European Turkey), Shipka Pass, Plevna, Kars, Ardahan and Erzerum (in the north-east) in Turkey. The Russians reach outskirts of Istanbul. Subsequent to this war, Ottoman Turkey had to voluntarily relinquished all its European territories such as Yugoslavia, Bosnia, and other Balkan states.

    1915: Britain and France assured Russia of the future possession of Istanbul (Constantinople) and the Straits.

    The Lebanese Christian author Alexander mentions certainly has the right to express what is good for all Arab Muslims, i.e., the Arab Caliphate or anything else. There were at least a dozen other famous Arab and non-Arab Muslim authors who never expressed anything of Russia taking over Palestine or Russia becoming some kind of supervisor of any Muslim areas. Also, no Arab author or activist ever said of “Arab Caliphate” just preceding WW1, they only promoted Arab nationalism (comprising each ottoman provinces) as was taught by the British and French masters to rulers and the so-called elites in Egypt, Jordan, the gulf states and Arabia proper which later became Saudi Arabia in 1932.

    The CALIPHATE is not a Shia idea, it is an exclusively Sunni Muslim maintstream idea (85% Muslim population) idea. The Shia ides is that of IMAMAT, led by their Imam only who only acknowledge Shia ideaology, which is contrary to Sunni ideology as it does not have any provision to accomodate the will of Muslim populace to select / elect the best man among them. Shia’s are no more than 15% of all Muslims, who are primarily focussed in lands that was controlled by the erstwhile Persian empire just preceding the passing away of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), i.e., comprising of Persia proper, Southern Iraq, parts of Syria which became Lebonan, and parts of Yemen. There are other pockets of Shias in Muslim lands just as there are Sunnis in predominantly Shia areas. There were large Sunni majority areas in Persia (now Iran) before 1600 which no longer exist.

    Sh. Imran does not promote “Arab Caliphate” in the sense guest Alexander mentions, please check with him directly instead of arguing with me. I doubt many Muslims, let alone non-Muslims, really understand the depth of thought Sh. Imran expresses. Unless one understands the intricacies of and specific, well defined and time tested Islamic guidelines, one would find himeself /herself promoting what Sh. Imran did not imply.

    Yes, Sh. Imran knows recent political history quite well, but he also has made errors in citing historical events and their understanding. I have expressed this a couple of months back in a TUT comment. I had contacted Sh Imran via his web site 2 to 3 years ago three times of his errors in his presentation of Dajjal, Zul-Qarnain and certain aspects of Gog and Magog, pointing speciaifically that he there is no need to say such and such thing specifically. He never responded other than a note subsequently appeared on his web site saying he is too busy completing his manuscript. To Sheikh Imran’s credit, the Sheikh did not repeat those thing that I pointed out and has not given any new lecture on those aspcts. Perhaps he agrees with me or he does not, it is hard to tell.

    My previous comments appear at:

    Please read them in entirety to get the whole picture, if any one cares.

    As I have said before, I greatly dislike any discussion of Shia vs Sunni whether religious, political, or regional power dynamics. For that matter even of the Wahabi / Takfiri or even of the Muslim Brotherhood. These are red herrings; today’s bashing of certain groups even by well intentioned activists is the opium for tomorrows intended on-slaught on them or on the innnocent people where such ideologies presumed to be popular; the well intentioned activist will cheer for the slaughter of those people and their lands only to realize the facts ten or twenty years later. It is my practice not to respond to any comments that do not contain specifics or fall below a minimum standard, no matter how weak the comment is. I don’t argue for the sake of argument.

  7. #7 by Frank on 08/18/2013 - 9:34

    Max, the next time you speak with Alexander would you ask him if the Russian people know about the jewish role is the events of 1917? And is the Russian medai under jewish control? Thank you

  8. #8 by Ingrid B on 08/19/2013 - 9:34

    avenzoar says : “The CALIPHATE is not a Shia idea, it is an exclusively Sunni Muslim maintstream idea (85% Muslim population) idea. The Shia ides is that of IMAMAT, led by their Imam only who only acknowledge Shia ideaology, which is contrary to Sunni ideology as it does not have any provision to accomodate the will of Muslim populace to select / elect the best man among them. Shia’s are no more than 15% of all Muslims, who are primarily focussed in lands that was controlled by the erstwhile Persian empire just preceding the passing away of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), i.e., comprising of Persia proper, Southern Iraq, parts of Syria which became Lebonan, and parts of Yemen. There are other pockets of Shias in Muslim lands just as there are Sunnis in predominantly Shia areas. There were large Sunni majority areas in Persia (now Iran) before 1600 which no longer exist.” :

    I wonder if this is not the root of the problem for muslims, the percentage ideaology. If Sunnis are the majority, they lord it over the Shias, and vice versa. Isn`t it vital that both forget this rivalry, and unite, combine the Caliphate, and the Imamat, break free from those who would use your differences against all of you, for their own agenda. Maybe muslims need an Iranian/Russian alliance, to show them the way, and there is, in my opinion, very little wrong with the Iranian way, but first, muslims everywhere must open their minds, eyes, and ears, in order to understand the importance of unity. Maybe someone should simplify, and unify, the ideaologies of both Sunni and Shia, this unity will strengthen both. Divided, you lay yourselves bare to the age old “divide and rule” tactics..

    Has anyone else noticed the similarities between the coup in Egypt, and the coup in Iran which ousted Mosadegh? (hope I spelled his name correctly.)

  9. #9 by Alex from Russia on 08/19/2013 - 9:34

    1. Dear Frank – naturally the Russkies know about the Jewish role in the “events” [as you say in the politically correct way, I assume?] of 1917. And not only Jewish one – but American, British, French, German, Latvian ones…..
    There are good films about Jews as the main destructors of Russia, for example, this one, made by our Federal Second Channel RTR on Trotsky

    Our Big KGB Tomcat tells about it plainly, but trying “not to stir up a hornet’s nest against himself”, as David Duke writes:

    Our famous very tough Nationalist [ex-political prisoner] Konstantin Dushenov [pro-Putin btw] tells as well about this speech by our President here; Dushenov and his friend Viktor Saulkin discuss the topic of the Jewish influence still in the Russian media [you another question]:

    2. Dear avenzoar – all historical facts CONCERNING RUSSIA mentioned by you at the beginning, are WELL-KNOWN for you [am historian, dear Sir]. If you don`t trust me about the topic of the Nikolay II` concerns on Palestine, you may find Dr. Pyotr Multatuli` books and read them. Today I may only insert here his corresp. quote:

    “[…] И что происходит в 1915 году? Николай II потребовал от союзников признать за Россией ее права, это было тайным договором признано. Нам должны были после победы отойти черноморские проливы, Константинополь, все Средиземноморское побережье, и самое главное – Палестина.
    – Святая святых…
    – Абсолютно верно. Еще Наполеон говорил: «Кто владеет Палестиной, тот владеет всем миром». Естественно, этого не могли допустить союзники! Кроме всего прочего, союзники очень хорошо поняли, что как только царская Россия выиграет войну, она становится державой номер один в мире. Ничего без решения России сделать было бы нельзя – единственная страна, которая могла бы воевать с Россией, была Германия. Если бы Германия была разбита, конечно, никакие Франция, Англия или Соединенные Штаты Америки не могли противостоять России. А это означало, что весь план нового мирового порядка, который уже тогда навязывался миру (это была главная тайная цель Первой мировой войны), рухнул бы. Никогда бы Николай II не позволил сделать то, что сделали с германским народом после Первой мировой войны – значит, не было бы Гитлера. Значит, если бы победил Николай II, никогда бы не было унижения других государств, никогда бы не возникли бандитские режимы, как режим Пилсудского, никогда бы не возникли те чудовищные структуры, которые дали потом фашизм не только в Германии и в Италии, а во всех приграничных с Россией государствах, в будущем – с Советским Союзом. И не надо забывать: вся Прибалтика была фашистская, Польша, Румыния – это были фашистские государства, в классическом смысле. В Польше православный человек не мог попасть ни в одно высшее заведение. Если бы Россия Николая II победила, то мир был бы совершенно другим – этого не допустили так называемые союзники. Именно поэтому они не просто поддержали, а возглавили заговор против Императора.[…]

    Concerning the Lebanese writer Mikha’il Na’ima` teacher in Nazareth, Antun Ballan, and his lectures on Khaliphate – all complains to Na`ima and his memory; as for me, I invented nothing: you may ck out Nai`ma book “Мои 70 лет”, Москва, 1980, стр. 111.

    Your other topics, as well as your theological dispute w/Sheikh Imran….Well, very interesting I guessl, but very scholarly ones. We need ACTION, not this endless intellectualism, disputes, and taaaaaakin, taaaakin [Moody Blues` song] – favorite sport of the American PATRIOTS 🙂

    Best regards,
    Alex Mezentsev

  10. #10 by Alex from Russia on 08/19/2013 - 9:34

    “Dear avenzoar – all historical facts CONCERNING RUSSIA mentioned by you at the beginning, are WELL-KNOWN FOR YOU” – correction: FOR ME.
    Sorry, typing 😦

  11. #11 by Alex from Russia on 08/19/2013 - 9:34

    Oh – I don`t agree w/Dr. Multatuli on his anti-fascism and anti-nazism, but the quote is instructive

  12. #12 by avenzoar on 08/19/2013 - 9:34

    Dear Alex (#9 Comment), again with all due respect to you:

    1. I am a known historian in my community in a major metropolitan area of the world, and modestly can say some what well known in far places; although my main profession is entirely different, was once a leading research contributor in my field, and was well known internationally. The reason few people know me outside is that I choose not give interviews by self discipline, not even to Muslim newspapers in my communtiy.

    2. I am the one giving the dates, chronology, sequences, and connecting dots from the past, filling in many gaps from the interview. Dear Alex, please do the same as a historian. I would be more than pleased. Anecdotes and individual instances are good but they usually drown out the bigger picture. I comment on them only on very critical issues, I may say as a tribute to some TUT contributors, hosts, and TUT readers who come with sincere hearts (as can be judged from some of their comments). Please do not take it as a personal criticism. The aspirations of any people is judged from a collection of thoughts propounded by the very people (in the case of your interview – the Arabs), not just one or two examples by Christian author(s). Your know well that the Middle East is predominanly Muslim, and I pointed out the sentiment of the overwhelming majority of Arabs.

    3. Since you have brought up only the Arab Christian perspective, I will mention the following for the benefit of TUT readers. The founder of Baath party, which began in greater Syria, then in Iraq, was Michael Aflaq, an Arab Christian. That same baath party that ruled Iraq until its destruction in 2005 and that same Bath party is ruling Syria even today. Christians are less than 10% in these two countries, and yet a christian originated party was the soul of political life of two great countires in the middle East. Give me one example of any country in the West and the East in the last fourteen hundred years, where with similar percentage any Muslim political ideology have ben given a days worth of life to run any major country. You should consider this as a tribute to broadminded attitude of Muslims.

    4. Also, I will mention the famous ARAB LEAGUE that you hear making resolutions on the future of Predominantly Muslim Middle East and the rest of Muslim world as acommand to follow. It was founded in March 1945 under the supervision of the British in the land what was Greater Syria before. The heads of the Arab League have more often than not been Christians, this includes the duration of their office. One of them by the name Clovis Maqsoud served for more than two and a half decades uniteruptedly. Mubarak’s dictatorship term of 30 years does not look that bad in comparison. Clovis Maqsoud’s long term covered all those difficult years in the 1970s and 1980s producing disasters for Muslims. Just before the current head of AL, it was a Christian from Egypt who served for ten years and his term saw the first decade of this century, and I do not have to tell you what have been happening to the people of the Arab world. Any one rationally looking at all this, would not blame Sunni or Shia when the polciy makers and enforcers are not the among the majority people. Democracy of the majority, anyone?

    5. I have given a few very detailed lectures on the topics I noted in my earlier post regarding sheikh Imran that go into historical facts far beyond the simplified stroy telling style of Sh. Imran (all of his lectures combined); mind you it is not a criticism of Sheikh Imran as he is addressing audience not familiar with even simple facts.

    6. You have entirely misunderstood that I have thological differences with Sheikh Imran. Nowhere I said so. I pointed out that Sh. Imran said things that he should not be saying, particularly as a Shaikh (religious leader) of Muslim community, and these things were not theology. Instead, my comments to Sheikh were were baselss inferences from history (Muslims and others) which would discredit him and his work in future and make him and Sunni Muslims a laughing stock by what appears to be his and ours omnipresent detractors. I did not elaborate further in order to limit my comments and did not want to give publicity of specific deficiencies. I will mention here one of three items I communicated to Sh. Imran. In one his lectures on Gog & Magog and Zul (Dhul) Qarnayn (he gave a few lectures on this topic with more or less content and I am refering the most likely the last one widely distributed, probably in 2009-2010 time frame), he said (and I am paraphrasing) the western end of earth is black sea and the eastern end of the earth is Caspain sea along the Caucasus Mountains. Would you or any one defend such ideas? Similarly he assumes things in his Dajjal (Anti-christ) lectures by referring to a authentic Hadith (sayings of the Prophet, pbuh) but with a far out interpretation that the island mentioned in the Hadith is England. I in fact I gave him some suggestions how to do further research on locating the place, if at all possible, including a suggestion to ask his researchers to look into it. Perhaps he does not have good researchers, only listeners. Sheikh Imran says that Daryal Pass is where the Zul-Qarnain built the iron wall to block Gog and Magog. He even shows picture of some area near Daryal pass in his book. Muslim Historical records do not mention Daryal pass but Derband (Derbend) in Dagestan as the place of the wall, among a couple of other places but not Daryal Pass. Sh. Imran now alerts his audience that you don’t have to believe or accept every thing I say. That is a good development.

    7. My postings are “not this endless intellectualism” but an effort to make correct historical connections. Without correct hisotorical connections of motives and long term plans, whether Russia or the West, ignorant actions would be a source of more trouble and devastation. This is exactly what we are seeing, action before understanding what is going on. As much as it may sound odd to most non-Muslims, Muslims have great intelelctual traditions even now when you think they are all backwards and you do not seem to find them on your favorite TV, newspapers or on the internet, yet they are writing, publishing and some are on the internet. The exclusive onslaught on Sunni Muslims, particuarly intellectuals, in our time is essentially the fear of them. I know some very competent and knowledgeable people in a few organizations, but when the PTB need a Muslim to represent them they will choose the most mediocre from those same organization while knowing fully the identity of the competent ones.

    8. I have commneted about a dozen times on TUT postings ever since 2009, and the founder of TUT (Mark Glenn) most likely remembers me. I do not comment elsewhere, and I do here because of a few well meaning individuals who post here and are sincerlely trying to understand what is happening and what has happened in the past.

    9. I have served as the Moderator of a prestigious, world renowned, secular University Alumni group for several years. That group discusses for more complex Muslim issues than you will see here. Its membership is limited to Alumni only.

    10. Alex, please continue your work as best as you know how with sincerity. My best wishes to you. There may be blind spots on which I may comment but it is done soley to add to the knowledge in a timely manner for TUT readers.

  13. #13 by avenzoar on 08/19/2013 - 9:34

    Dear Ingrid (#8 Comment):

    Thank you for well thought out comments. The percent (85 vs. 15) has never been the main issue for Muslims, I only point out for the benefit of TUT readers, its territorial spread, and its connection to former Persian empire. The apparent Sunni-Shia divide is not of percentages but theological as well as political because in Islam running the affairs of community and by extension of the society is an essential part of the faith. This does not mean interfering with other peoples’ faith. Actually, Islamic rule has demonstarted throughout its history in widely different societies by giving non-Muslims their own courts and adminstrators and appointed their own religious leaders to deal with peculiarities and sentiments of non Mulsim peoples according to their own religious and moral standards, as long as the public is not exposed to outragous conduct by a few, like the ones exposed in some TUT posts.

    Historically, in many ways, as difficult and strange as it may sound the continuing conflict is the “Great Persian Heritage” vs. the “so-called backward Arab bedouin of the 7th century of Prophet Muhamad’s time”. The persians have never accepted the complete destruction of Persian Empire mere 15 years after Prophet Muhamamd, ca. 650 ce by the Muslims (then primarily Arabs). The more Iran becomes advanced the more this difference will emerge, the anti-Arab and Anti-Sunni feeling will emerge from the shadows, not-withstanding numerous present and past efforts by both sides to work together.

    You may know that when Ayatollah Khomainei came on the world scene with Iranian revolution in 1978-79, the overwhelming majority of Sunni Muslims including Sunni religious scholars approved of him openly and without reservation of him being Shia. Some Sunnis of african-american origin in the USA even adopted Shia school of thought because of the revolution. However, the Iranian hostage crisis (444 days, with daily closing of evening news broadcast in the USA with the day count) and Ayatollah’s encouragement to now go out and spread Shia ideology every where and conquer Jerusalem (which would have required passing through Sunni Muslim territories), scared all kinds of people – nearby rulers, the Sunni Muslims, the special who and the West (Christian world). Sunni Muslims are generally very broadminded as they come from all cultures, nations and tribes of our world. Also they have intemarried across cultures and races freely throughout 1400 years of history. It is this large mix of people from the world of Sunni Muslims, infiltrators within, combined with external forces of all kinds imposed on them that has made it difficult for Sunni Muslims to cope with challenges since 1850s. As with anything, difficulties are never permanent.

    Muslim efforts to reduce the tension between the two communities have been unceasing from the early days after the Prophet. You may or may not know, in those very early days during the life of the Prophet and early successors, there was no Shia community, they were all Sunni (the followers of the Sunnah, the traditions of the Prophet). Shia sect came up explcitly after the unfortunate events, the immense tragedy of the killing of Hussian (ra, Martyrdoom) about 50 years after the Prophet (in 680 CE) in Karbala near Kufa in Southern Iraq; and more openly as an organized sect in Southern Iraq about one hundred years after the passing away of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). To put Shia developemnt in Christian terms (in developement not theology), the Shia are like Protestantism which came after splitting from Catholicism, about twelve centuries later. One should not forget that there were other Christian churches before catholicism was formulated initially in 325 CE, Council of Nicea, and many of those churches have survived to this date in their original setting in the middle east under fourteen centuries of Muslim rule.

    For those who care to know: The murderer of the Hussain (ra), the second grandson of the Prophet and Third Imam of the Shia, was a Parsi, Zoroastrian, of Persian orign by the name Shimar bin Ziljoshan who was appointed by the govenor of Kufa as a local military commander, when disputed ruler by the name Yazid ruled from Damascus. In great Islamic traditions, Muslims do not hesitate to appoint non-Muslims who had prior good records to high positions, if they are not suspected of any misconduct or future evil designs. Infiltrators do come in fascinating shades and varieties. All Sunni Muslims have high regard of Hussain (ra), who is the Third Imam of Shia.

    It is interesting to point out that the murderer of Umar, the Second Caliph after the Prophet, was a Persian by the name Abu Lulu. This happened in Medina in the mosque where Prophet Muhamamd is burried, the second holiest place in Islam. Caliph Umar is the one under whom the Persian empire came under Muslims rule and it is under Caliph Umar (ra) Jerusalem (637 CE), Palestine and Syria came under Muslims, ca 640 CE. He is the one who identified the location of Al-Aqsa mosque (third Holiest place in Islam) in Jerusalem from Prophet Muhamad’s description. And Caliph Umar is the first ruler who allowed Jews to settle in Jerusalem, who as a fair ruler responsible for all his subjects acknowledged the right of the people of two previously revealed religion. About six centuries before, the Romans had permanently expelled Jews from Jerusalem and they were forbidden (under penalty) to look towards Jerusalem even from a distance.

    It should be interesting to know the Ali (ra), the father of Hussain and son-in-law of the Prophet (pbuh), served as the chief Justice of first three Caliph (ABu Bakr, Umar, and Usman (ra). Ali (ra) became the fourth Caliph recognized by all Sunnis, who is also known as First Imam of Shia. The Caliphate is the original system of rule in Islam which ended in 1909 by the removal of Caliph Abdul Hamid II.

  14. #14 by Ingrid B on 08/20/2013 - 9:34

    avenzoar, thankyou for the above. I`m a person of few words, who hopes that there will be unity in the ME, that arabs/muslims, will reclaim their lands, and find peace..

  15. #15 by Alex from Russia on 08/20/2013 - 9:34

    Dear avenzoar! – all your comments are fine for me, over-intellectualism when we are in need of Syrian Army/Hezbollah-like ACTION, but anyway, nice [even in spite of your manners of quite haughty knowall].
    You write:
    ” I am the one giving the dates, chronology, sequences, and connecting dots from the past, filling in many gaps from the interview. Dear Alex, please do the same as a historian”. Can you give me single example of historical mistakes from my end in my interview? Ah – yeah, one mistake, I admit: the Soviet Marshal Eremenko` first name was Andrey, not Nikolay [we had famous actor Nikolay Eremenko here, so, sometimes such twists are natural in huan mind]. Anecdotes? What kind of? When Max and yours truly made some oh so rude anti-Semitic jokes? So what? But these jokes were born from my story about really tragic event in Kiev, Sept. 45 – cold-blooded murder of two brave Ukrainian veterans by Jewish coward is NOT FUNNY ANECDOTE, but historical fact. Stupid arrogant letter of some Jewish big shots to Stalin – not funny anecdote, but historical fact. Etc.
    What else? Palestine as possible Russian Protectorate? – try to find Dr. Multatuli` books, or try to rite to him, koz he found corresp. DOCUMENTS in our archives, not me.
    Na’ima` recollections? Not me, this Lebanese writer instead.
    What else? May be the Soviet Navy` role in the USS LIBERTY tragedy? Books by solid researches, recollections of witnesses.
    Yanks acted in Afghanistan, starting Op. Cyclone – the Russkies RE-acted with unprepared invasion back in 1979? Big Zbig for Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998.
    Sadat` conspiracy in 1973? – all questions to Israel Shamir and Dr. Vinogradov

    Euphrates Cossack Host? Was founded in 1912 mainly in the regions of “the Russian interests” in Northern Persia……

    As for your other topics, one-two-three etc: we are not Arabs, Max and yours sincerely. Pro-Arab – yes, but – as for me personally, I don`t know ALL NUANCES you`ve mentioned for at least one reason: I don`t know Arabic [alas I`d say] in order to read etc about all corresp. topics firsthand [likewise you don`t know all nuances as regards of the Cossack history].

  16. #16 by avenzoar on 08/20/2013 - 9:34

    Dear Alex (#15 Comment)

    Nice to hear from you again, with a little pincer ” … [even in spite of your manners of quite haughty knowall].”

    You still don’t get the thrust of my comments by repeatedly asserting your version of history as the only worth attention and asking me to read some references, and quoting things in Russian. All my comments have references in most widely read Eglish language. Again, you have incorrectly presumed that I am referring to Arabic literature.

    I have no problem with Max and your background, and have far more clear vision of limtations of someone who is not a Muslim or does not know Arab or Muslim culture and its nuances. By the way I am not an Arab and by now you would have realized not even Persian (Iranian). By the same token you should not be so jugdemental about some army like Syria / Hezboolah as a model for everyone else.

    I have been avoiding any discussion of Russia’s role in the past sxity years, even though I saw Ingrid’s recommendation for Muslims to follow what Russia / Iran has done.

    Long Before Iran became involved with Russia (rather I should say when Iran was entirely with the US and Israel), the rest of Sunni Muslims of Middle East depended on Russia since World War 2. Any average observer of Middle East can tell you that Russia has not been useful for any country from Libya, egypt, Yemen to Iraq, other than selling weapons and going through pretentions in the Security council, certinly no where near as strong as the US has been protecting its allies.

    On that note, I am often reminded of the TV images I saw of Soviet Glosnost / Russian Foreign Minsiter standing in front of the White House lawn in September, October or November 1990 clearly stating and warning Saddam and Iraqi military leadership to “give up” because we (Soviet /Russia) have just delivered jamming codes to the Americans (so don’t count much on your MIG planes). That is the level of commitment Soviet / Russia had for their strongest ally Iraq run by Baathist who followed a modified form of communist model. Don’t rtry to convince me that Russia of today is somehow different from Soviets of 1990. I can forecast that asimillar thing will happen to Iran again at a time when Iran will be needing Russia most. The argument has been made that Iran will be able to defend itself with their own developed technology, so was the case with Iraqis who in 1990 also had developed their own rather advanced technology. One must not forget, military technology far more advanced (at least one genration of technolgy development) exist with Israel and all militarized states outside Muslim countries.

    Over the past few months, some commentators at TUT have wondered or expressed concern over why Russia did not help Syria until after major devastation (of half of Syrian cities) of Syria while clealry seeing foreign forces operating with heavy weapons, even shooting down military planes.

    The answer is very simple: Super powers are not in the business of being freely benevolent. They wait long enough until the country is question is on its knees, that way they can extract much by secret agreements far more serious to sovereignty of the beseiged country. Medvedev stopping Missile delivery to Iran had nothing to do with some policy issues or not good relations with Iran. it is that fundamental operative principle I just described of extracting as much as possible by secret agreement. Our posturing just by reading published news is not going to add any comfort.

    Libya was already gone to the West and Rothschilds (via Qaddafi’s son) after waiting for Russian help for nearly two decades even diplomatically / politcally in the Security Council .(remember President Reagon’s authorized attack on Libya and Qaddafi’s compound in mid 1980s). There was nothing left for Russians to gain from Libya by supporting even diplomatically in the Security Council in 2012.

    I can also understand why Palestinain leadership in Gaza had split in strategy with respect to Iran and Hezbollah. When your house (territory) is being pounded mercilessly by WMD / white phosphorus and your friends like Iran, Hezbollah, Syria, and their so-called super friend Russia do not have a voice in the UN or SC to even stop the slaughter of innocent civilians, one can understand why they have to figure things out for themsleves. Iran’s goodwill to Palestinians in Gaza is just to keep another potential front open when Iran finds itself in a tight situation.

    As I have said, super powers do not have the habit of being benevolent for free, the one thing they know well is how to extract as much as possible by selling weapons and erode what is left of a nation’s sovereignty by secret agreements. Major powers have their own regional designs and negotiate among each other (give and take) at the expense of small fishes. Blindly depending on some Super Power is a recipe for contuing disaster.

  17. #17 by Max French on 08/20/2013 - 9:34


    With mutual respect, we have a am agreement to disagree.
    Endless posting of historical fine hairs while the world burns wastes time and resources.

    Alex is quite correct, the action of putting out the fire trumps debates of hot or cold water.

    See you in the spectator gallery or on the field battling the flames!

  18. #18 by Mustafa on 08/21/2013 - 9:34

    Just wanted to add a few things. Sorry for the long post, but did want to clarify few things. Discussions are good and important as long as we don’t get lost in them , so there is always need for balance.

    @Ingrid: I don’t know whether I would agree or disagree with you and others on Egypt. Three scenarios are being debated online, One is that the Army has the support of US/Israel against MB. The second is that the Army is nationalistic and has taken down the Foreign puppet Morsi and the MB. Third is that US Israel almost back both sides creating chaos and that this is a result mainly of a genuine internal disupute and conflict between MB and Army. I suggest we not be quick to judge and wait and see what takes place and how the Egyptian Army behaves, maybe they are a force for stability. The MB are definitely no angels, but I try not to make quick judgements, anything is possible The Egyptian Army I heard did stop Egypts relations with IMF, so that’s something.

    @Avenzoar, Ingrid : Unity is possible, We already have and can continue peaceful co-existence , the need of the hour is actually establishing stability, security and law and order, because its not Suni and Shia masses that are fighting , rather its militias that are fighting and many innocent people get caught in the crossfire.

    Also Avenzoar, I disagree with your comments on the Shia. Firstly Imam Khomieni urged for unity and never expressed exclusivity of the Shia school of thought and never tried to ”spread Shiaism” , this is not true. Also neither Shia nor Sunni existed during the time of Prophet Muhammad SAWW because each school claims to follow the Sunna and distinctions in both schools appeared later. It is difficult and complex to answer the question as to which ”school came first and when”

    Lastly the killing of Imam Hussein (A.S) was not done by Dhil Jawshan because he was Zorostrian, but because he was Yazids puppet and was with Umar ibn Saads Army. They are all beasts in human form who attacked Imam Hussein (A.S) and Ahle Bait (A.S) on the grounds of Karbala. This was Yazids lust for power that made this event. Also the rise of Shia Sunni differences is not comparable to the Protestant – Catholic divide in Christianity.

  19. #19 by avenzoar on 08/21/2013 - 9:34

    Mustafa (#18 comment):

    Do not expect from me any more comments because of Max French’s (#17, host of that program) hair splitting reference, although all that has been fine tuned to nth degree over numerous programs on TUT when it comes to JFK assassination, USS Liberty, Germany ww2, Aryan history and heritage, holy mother Russia, and other similar topics. I will not be listening to the Max’s recorded program so I don’t get tempted to write comments. Whether you agree with me ot not is not important to me and does not bother me; what I wrote on Shia vs Sunni and Imam Khomainee is historically more correct and balanced than just PR opinions.

  20. #20 by Alex from Russia on 08/21/2013 - 9:34

    Dear Avenzoar:

    1. “By the way I am not an Arab and by now you would have realized not even Persian (Iranian)” – and I am not clairvoyant, I dont know about your ethnic/religious/racial origin, also real name, family-name. Only that you`re V.I.P. in scientific circles reckon globally, so God bless you.

    2. “and quoting things in Russian. All my comments have references in most widely read Eglish language” – in such cases, when some important material for me is, say, in Spanish, Turkish, Bantu whatever, I use google-translator. Pretty rough but useful. Dare to recommend.

    3. Russian Monarchy/Soviet Union/Russian Federation` relations with the Arab World, Iran, Ummah whatever – ooooohhhh WHAT A COMPLEX problem!!!!!!!!!!!….I`d like to recommend you to find solid monographs by our leading Arabists, but reckon the majority of their works are in Russian, and suppose you were too highly intellectual in order to study this Barbaric Russian language years ago; simply you don`t like the Ruskies, eh? generally? So, my possible reply on your “Don’t rtry to convince me that Russia of today is somehow different from Soviets of 1990”
    would be like “peas on the wall”, as the Russian proverb tells…

    4. “why Russia did not help Syria until after major devastation (of half of Syrian cities) of Syria while clealry seeing foreign forces operating with heavy weapons, even shooting down military planes.”
    “The answer is very simple” indeed: the Syrians don`t want it. This is SYRIAN WAR, NOT THE RUSSIAN ONE! Russkies hate ANY foreign involvement, from their own end into the problems of other Nations as well. For ex. – this oh so nasty, so terrible “aggression of the Russian Barbarians” against Zionist regime of Prague [1968] was made with extreme reluctance, after the Zionist course the Prague government had become obvious absolutely.
    So, dear Sir – again, this is STRICTLY Syrian War. Are there any complains from the Syrian end: “Where are the Russian troops on the ground? In Damascus, in Aleppo?”?? – I doubt!
    The Russians see how America failed – due to the STUPIID, HORRIBLE overextension of her National forces, resources, energy – mainly abroad. All tis endless BS, or “patriotic wars”, as dumb Americans call it. The Russians want to build their Statehood after devastations of 1990s and 2000s [indeed, REAL national revival started – JUST STARTED! – only after the oust of Medvedev and the beginning of new term of Putin]. The Russians don`t want to see how their Nation would fail, following American Imperialism` pattern.

    Best regards from the Empire of Evil,
    Alex Mezentsev

  21. #21 by bigcree1 on 08/21/2013 - 9:34

    Alex fropm Russia! Thankyou and your common sense comments ring true. EVERY WORD! I have followed this exchange between yourself and avenzoar. So far he makes a lot of informative comments but takes it a bit over the top in embellishing and ‘hair splitting’ as Max put it. No to dismiss him but I tend to agree more with your remarks regarding Russia and her position in the Syrian War. They are exercising the most proper and logical restraint. Unlike the drunk with power Zionist U.S. and “israel”. Making life miserable for the Nations and States they wish to overthrow by proxy (Takfiri Mercs) and other means. And by means it’s quite literal! A most mean spirited and anti human endeavor to completely DOMINATE and ENSLAVE the entire globe, no matter the costs. That is truly pathetic as well as despicable, not to mention stupid!

  22. #22 by Ingrid B on 08/22/2013 - 9:34

    Mustafa says, “I suggest we not be quick to judge and wait and see what takes place and how the Egyptian Army behaves, maybe they are a force for stability.” :

    I`m afraid I`ve seen enough of how the Egyptian Army behaves, their Israeli/US style slaughter of civilians was inexcusable, and does not bode well for stability..

    I hope that Alex, and Avenzoar, can put the past behind them, and concentrate on what needs to be done now..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: