French    German    Spain    Italian    Arabic    Chinese Simplified    Russian

Western Civilisation

Until the advent of materialism and 19th c. dogma, Western Civilisation was  superior to anything Islam had developed.  Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam.  Proof of this resides in the 'modern' world and the unending political-economic and spiritual poverty of Muslim states and regions.  Squatting on richer civilisations is not 'progress'.  Islam is pagan, totalitarian, and irrational.   

Archive - August 2023

The Crusades, Christianity, and Islam, Jonathan Riley-Smith (2008)

A necessary and moral endeavour

Bookmark and Share


In 2008 Crusader and Medieval historian Riley-Smith compiled a brief pamphlet (80 pages) on the important topic of the Crusades and the interactions with the cult of Submission.  It is well worth reading, including 24 pages of sources and references he supplies.  The ‘clash of civilisations’ is one of the major issues in our times, along with the civil war destroying what is left of ‘Western Civilisation’.  One of the benefactors of the imploding West will be the Musulman states bordering post-Christian, post-truth Europe.  They will have ample opportunity through emigration, demography and Western suicide through ‘woke’ and ‘politically correct’ cultural Marxist zeitgeist to take over vast swathes of Europe which had previously defeated the Jihad for some 1200 years.



Riley-Smith looks at the era of Crusading starting from 1095 to 1300 and picks up the story again from 1800 to 2007.  Writing and speaking in 2007, he states that the ‘politico-religio’ hostility has a long history, much of it unknown in the ‘West’ ignorant as most of the masses are about history and reality.  The terms Crusader and Crusading are used with aplomb to define this 1400-year conflict with few cognisant of what they mean or why they occurred. 


In fact, as Riley-Smith proves, ‘Arab Nationalism, and Pan-Islamism…share perceptions of crusading that have more to do with 19th century European imperialism than with actuality.’  He is right of course.  The corruption by Walter Scott in the 19th and later using the same corroded untrue strains by historian Steve Runciman in the mid-20th century, have given the ‘West’ and ‘Musulmans’ an inaccurate and ridiculous declaration of Crusaders and Crusading.  Neither of these two men was a historian in the real sense of the word.  And neither had any real idea about the subject matter.  Their output is grossly inaccurate and prejudiced but it is popular because it serves the secular society and feeds the anti-Christian, anti-Catholic culture of our times.


The above is a key insight from Riley-Smith and often appears in his other works as well.  In this short work he elaborates on the lie that the Crusades were barbaric, unprovoked, and of no value.  Catholics had suffered 400 years of endless Musulman Jihad, war, sex enslavement, destruction and the annihilation of men, women and some 30.000 churches from 630 AD to 1095 AD; not to forget the thousands of unarmed pilgrims raped and slaughtered by Musulmans.  2/3 of Christianity was taken over and wiped out by the Mahomentan Jihad and Spain and France were at risk of permanent Mahometan occupation.  The entire fabric of the political-economy and the continuity of the Catholic world around the Mediterranean basin was destroyed.


“The Crusades themselves were deeply embedded in popular Catholic ideas and devotional life.  They were not thoughtless explosions of barbarism.  The theory of force that underlay them was relatively sophisticated and was considered to be theologically justifiable by a society that felt itself threatened.  It is hard now to conceive of the intensity of the attachment felt for the holy places in Jerusalem, the concern aroused by heresy and physical assaults on the church, and the fear Westerners had of Muslim invaders who reached central France in the 8th century, and Vienna in the 16th and again the 17th century.”


The Crusades were a part of an all-out war to save civilisation.  Not just the Holy Land, but in Spain and in Provence against the demonic evil of the Albigensians.  Internal and external enemies – much the same as we have today – were rending and tearing at civilisation.  Without the Byzantine Crusades which were never called as such but starting in the 8th century the Eastern Christians were the first to fight back against the Musulman hordes, and as Riley-Smith illustrates, without the muscular, uncompromising Catholic response starting in Spain the 8th century and continuing for almost 570 years, Europe would not exist.


As Riley-Smith warns, the cultural degradation now apparent in 2023, was manifestly obvious in 2008, and was premised on ‘secular Marxism’, or cultural-Marxism, dressed up as ‘democracy’, ‘liberalism’ and other nice sounding political-platitudes, none of them accurate or true.  He wrote that our own ‘values’ would be as foreign and ridiculous to anyone from the past, as it will be to anyone from the future.  They are not the ‘right values’, and do not represent our civilisations or cultural history.  What we have today as a ‘culture’ is historically anomalous, insidious and quite evil.  The anti-Catholicism and hatred of Christianity which permeates the ‘West’ is the rejection of reality, history and real culture.  Musulmans suffer no such anxiety about their cult.  Our weakness due to our ignorance is their opportunity.  Herein lies the core of the problem cited by Riley-Smith.  Hating and debasing the Crusades without knowing much about them just highlights our own ignorance and febrility. 


Thomas Sowell and the affliction of slavery throughout history, including White enslavement

Roman, Greek, Ottoman and other empires were built on White slavery

Bookmark and Share


THOMAS Sowell was born in 1930 into extreme poverty in the Jim Crow South during the Great Depression. Growing up in Harlem as a black orphan, he dropped out of high school, didn’t earn a college degree until he was 28 and didn’t write his first book until he was 40. He served in the Marine Corps in the Korean War, graduated magna cum laude from Harvard in economics, earned a Masters from Columbia and went on to become an internationally known economist, social theorist, philosopher, author and latterly Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. In 2002 he won the National Humanities Medal and the Francis Boyer award in 2017. In 2020, at the age of 90, Sowell published his 36th book, Charter Schools and Their Enemies. 

Today, however, there are many colleges and universities who are openly opposed to letting Dr Sowell address their students.

What did he do to deserve that? What crime has this man – an all-American success story – committed? What did this thinker, whose quotations are doing the rounds on social media to this day, do wrong?  

First of all he became a conservative; second, more heinous perhaps, he became the best internationally known black (conservative) thinker – and one entirely unafraid to challenge received wisdom on race discrimination.

It goes all the way back to the 1970s when Sowell’s criticisms of the direction of the civil rights movement drew attack and his early ‘cancellation’. Black elites as well as the rest of the leftist elite establishment wanted nothing to do with him because he opposed ‘affirmative action’. But Sowell argued that the problems blacks face involved far more than what whites have done to them in the past, that focusing on white racism was not helping the black underclass. He has been proved right time and again as his biographer, Jason L Riley points out in this 2022 lecture and tribute to him. It is worth reading in full.

Today, Riley points out, efforts to defund the police are being pushed by activists and liberal elites who claim to be speaking on behalf of low-income minorities but are mostly speaking for themselves, something he says that Sowell began focusing on long ago.

‘Sowell would often be asked how it felt to go against the grain of so many other blacks. He would inevitably correct the premise of the question. “You don’t mean I go against the grain of most blacks,” he would respond. “You mean I go against the grain of most black intellectuals, most black elites. But black intellectuals don’t represent most blacks any more than white intellectuals represent most whites”.’ 

Nowhere has Sowell gone against the grain more than with his critique of the slavery debate, today permitted to be understood only through the prism of ‘critical race theory’ (whites are indelibly racist) which has now entered US elementary schools through The New York Times 1619 Project, and which puts the institution of slavery at the centre of America’s founding.

It is fundamentally wrong, Sowell argues. What makes America unique is not slavery; it’s emancipation – the economic and social progress of black Americans in only a few generations unmatched in recorded history.

His analysis and debunking all elements of the white racism slavery myth need as wide as possible transmission. That is why we are showing 14 short videos he’s produced and presents which take on the different elements and examine the facts to expose the many widespread flawed assumptions about slavery.  Source


Arab and Muslim Slavery - an inconvenient truth - by Thomas Sowell

A Black American Academic sets the record straight.

Bookmark and Share

Blacks, Muslims and Arabs were the great slave traders of Blacks. Some 50 million were enslaved. Whites were also enslaved en masse by the Muslims - some 25 millions over 1400 years.

Black slaves were treated far worse by Muslims than Whites in general as given by death rates and the mere fact that no Black culture exists within Arab countries or the emirates to which Blacks were sent.

The great Christian David Livingstone provided first hand proof of the barbarity of the Arab-Black slave trade still thriving in the mid to late 19th century.  His journeys were undertaken to shine a light on this barbarism and end it. 


Today some 5 million Blacks are still enslaved by Blacks and Muslims.

Mein Koran in summary: Kill the Infidel Bastards

Infidels include Christians, Jews, Polytheists and any Muslim who questions his/her own cult...

Bookmark and Share

What Does the Quran Really Say About Non-Muslims? | About Islam


Mein Koran, or ‘Recital’, is the most brutal, bloody and supremacist book in the history of ‘theology’, though it takes a creative mind to connect Muhammad’s cult and its doctrines to religion.  Yet perversely, in our ‘Dumb Ages’ it is a protected icon, you can’t criticise it, burn it, or use it as a repository for faeces.  To give this book its justified honours, you might well be imprisoned in many countries within the demented, perverted and increasingly fascistic ‘West’.


Mein Koran can be simplified and summarised to Sura 9:5 when it commands Muhammad’s legions of cult devotees to “Kill them”, with them being Christians, Jews and polytheists.  Then when the Sacred Months (the Ist, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikun (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.  Mushrikun is another Arab word for Infidel.  Someone who is a ‘Mushrik’ practices ‘Shirk’ or who disbelieves in Muhammad’s cult and his moon or celestial deity, Al-Lah.


Most Suras or chapters are devoted in part to violence and war against Shirk and the Mushrikun.  Sura 5:33 expresses the goal in lurid terms, “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter.” 


In Moslem theology ‘waging war’ against the moon or celestial deity Al Lah includes violence against any who do not convert to the cult, or who deny any aspect of Muhammad’s importance, his revelations, statements or demands.  In Muslim theology non-compliance is viewed as ‘waging war’.  In other words, a practicing peaceful Christian living in a Moslem state can be charged with ‘blasphemy’ for being a ‘Zalimun’ or polytheist-trinity worshipper, and for not joining Muhammad’s cult and in the ‘modern’ world, this is a regular occurrence.


Of the major Suras 2-9, at least 30% on average are dedicated to war, violence and hate against the Mushrikun or Infidel.  Sura 9 is the last and most important Sura within Musulman belief and jurisprudence, and its apogee of clamouring hate and bile reaches an apex in 9:29:


“Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” 


The destruction of Zalimun, Mushrikun and those who Shirk are not stories from the 7th and 8th centuries, outlining tribal or territorial conflict as we find in the Old Testament.  Slaughtering the ‘Canaanites’, ‘Moabites’, ‘Amalekites’ or ‘Edomites’ as referenced in the Old Testament describe Bronze-Age history, wars and the violence needed to create a priesthood dedicated to monotheism and Yahweh.  These conflicts do not form part of Old Testament laws or Jewish regulations (some 641 of them). 


Not so with Muhammad’s cult.  The violence in the Koran against non-Muslims is the foundation of Musulman theological practice called by the bien pensant as ‘laws’, though they are not ‘laws’ but barbaric relics stretching back into the Bronze age and to celestial cult worship.  Modern day expressions too numerous to list include:

“Muslims must kill kafirs wherever they are unless they convert,”

said Ali Gomaa, Grand Mufti of Egypt.

“Islam says: kill all of the kafirs. Jihad stands for killing all kafirs,”

proclaimed Ayatollah Khomeini.

“Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us,”

wrote Osama bin Laden.

“Jews and Christians are filthy. Their lives and property can be taken by the Muslims in jihad,”

preached Yasir Qadhi in Tennessee.


Denying any verse instantly makes a Mahometan an apostate, a ‘Munafiqun’, one who has left the cult and this is punishable by death.  “If they had gotten rid of the punishment for apostasy Islam would not exist today”, said the famous scholar and broadcaster Yusuf al Qaradawi.  Not being able to leave the cult and enforcing ‘Sharia’ or a complete totalitarian imposition of control, including blind devotion to Muhammad on pain of death, is why the curse of Mahometanism is still with the world.  Mein Koran equates apostasy with Mushriqun and Shirk – in other words it is the same as being an Infidel and should be punished by death and hellfire.