Benedict XVI and today’s Muslims opposite Manuel II Palaeologus and his Turkic Interlocutor

Or why I defended Pope Benedict XVI in 2006 against the thoughtlessly irascible Muslims 

When a Muslim writes an Obituary for the Catholic Church’s sole Pope Emeritus…

Table of Contents

I. From Joseph Ratzinger to Pope Benedict XVI

II. The theoretical concerns of an intellectual Pope

III. Benedict XVI: A Pope against violence and wars

IV. Manuel II Palaeologus and the Eastern Roman Empire between the Muslim Ottoman brethren and the Anti-Christian Roman enemies

V. The unknown (?) Turkic mystic interlocutor and the Islamic centers of science and reason that Benedict XVI ignored

VI. Excerpt from Benedict XVI’s lecture given on the 12th September at the University of Regensburg under title ‘Faith, Reason and the University–Memories and Reflections’

VII. The problems of the academic-theological background of Benedict XVI’s lecture

VIII. Benedict XVI’s biased approach, theological mistakes, intellectual oversights and historical misinterpretations

IX. The lecture’s most controversial point

X. The educational-academic-intellectual misery and the political ordeal of today’s Muslim states

Of all the Roman popes who resigned the only to be called ‘Pope Emeritus’ was Joseph Ratzinger Pope Benedict XVI (also known in German as Prof. Dr. Papst), who passed away on 31st December 2022, thus sealing the circle of world figures and heads of states whose life ended last year. As a matter of fact, although being a head state, a pope does not abdicate; he renounces to his ministry (renuntiatio).

Due to lack of documentation, conflicting sources or confusing circumstances, we do not have conclusive evidence as regards the purported resignations of the popes St. Pontian (235), Marcellinus (304), Liberius (366), John XVIII (1009) and Sylvester (105). That is why historical certainty exists only with respect to the ‘papal renunciation’ of six pontiffs; three of them bore the papal name of ‘Benedict’. The brief list includes therefore the following bishops of Rome: Benedict V (964), Benedict IX (deposed in 1044, bribed to resign in 1045, and resigned in 1048), Gregory VI (1046), St Celestine (1294), Gregory XII (1415) and Benedict XVI (2013).

I. From Joseph Ratzinger to Pope Benedict XVI   

Benedict XVI (18 April 1927 – 31 December 2022) was seven (7) years younger than his predecessor John Paul II (1920-2005), but passed away seventeen (17) years after the Polish pope’s death; already on the 4th September 2020, Benedict XVI would have been declared as the oldest pope in history, had he not resigned seven (7) years earlier. Only Leo XIII died 93, back in 1903. As a matter of fact, Benedict XVI outlived all the people who were elected to the Roman See.

Benedict XVI’s papacy lasted slightly less than eight (8) years (19 April 2005 – 28 February 2013). Before being elected as pope, Cardinal Ratzinger was for almost a quarter century (1981-2005) the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which was the formal continuation of the Office of the Holy Inquisition, and therefore one of the most important sections (‘dicasteries’; from the Ancient Greek term ‘dikasterion’, i.e. ‘court of law’) of the Roman administration (‘Curia’).

A major step toward this position was his appointment as archbishop of Munich for four years (1977-1981); Bavaria has always been a Catholic heavyweight, and in this regard, it is easy to recall the earlier example of Eugenio Pacelli (the later pope Pius XII), who was nuncio to Bavaria (and therefore to the German Empire), in Munich, from 1917 to 1920, and then to Germany, before being elected to the Roman See (in 1939). Before having a meteoric rise in the Catholic hierarchy, Ratzinger made an excellent scholar and a distinct professor of dogmatic theology, while also being a priest. His philosophical dissertation was about St. Augustine and his habilitation concerned Bonaventure, a Franciscan scholastic theologian and cardinal of the 13th c.

II. The theoretical concerns of an intellectual Pope

During his ministry, very early, Benedict XVI stood up and showed his teeth; when I noticed his formidable outburst against the ‘dictatorship of relativism’, I realized that the German pope would be essentially superior to his Polish predecessor. Only in June 2005, so just two months after his election, he defined relativism as “the main obstacle to the task of education”, directing a tremendous attack against the evilness of ego and portraying selfishness as a “self-limitation of reason”.

In fact, there cannot be more devastating attack from a supreme religious authority against the evilness of Anglo-Zionism and the rotten, putrefied society that these criminals diffuse worldwide by means of infiltration, corruption, mendacity, and simulation. Soon afterwards, while speaking in Marienfeld (Cologne), Benedict XVI attacked ferociously all the pathetic ideologies which indiscriminately enslave humans from all spiritual and cultural backgrounds. He said: “absolutizing what is not absolute but relative is called totalitarianism”. This is a detrimental rejection of Talmudic Judaism, Zohar Kabbalah, and Anglo-Zionism.

It was in the summer 2005 that I first realized that I should study closer the pre-papal past of the Roman Pontiff whom St Malachy’s illustrious Prophecy of the Popes (12th c.) described as ‘Gloria olivae’ (the Glory of the olive). I contacted several friends in Germany, who extensively updated me as regards his academic publications, also dispatching to me some of them. At the time, I noticed that my Christian friends already used to question a certain number of Cardinal Ratzinger’s positions.

But, contrarily to them, I personally found his prediction about the eventuality of Buddhism becoming the principal ‘enemy’ of the Catholic Church as quite plausible. My friends were absolutely astounded, and then I had to narrate and explain to them the deliberately concealed story of the Christian-Islamic-Confucian alliance against the Buddhist terrorism of the Dzungar Khanate (1634-1755); actually, it took many Kazakh-Dzungar wars (1643-1756), successive wars between Qing China and the Dzungar Khanate (1687-1757), and even an alliance with the Russian Empire in order to successfully oppose the ferocious Buddhist extremist threat.

Finally, the extraordinary ordeal of North Asia {a vast area comprising lands of today’s Eastern Kazakhstan, Russia (Central Siberia), Northwestern and Western China (Eastern Turkestan/Xinjiang and Tibet) and Western Mongolia} ended up with the systematic genocide of the extremist Buddhist Dzungars (1755-1758) that the Chinese had to undertake because there was no other way to terminate once forever the most fanatic regime that ever existed in Asia.

Disoriented, ignorant, confused and gullible, most of the people today fail to clearly understand how easily Buddhism can turn a peaceful society into a fanatic realm of lunatic extremists. The hypothetically innocent adhesion of several fake Freemasonic lodges of the West to Buddhism and the seemingly harmless acceptance of Buddhist principles and values by these ignorant fools can end up in the formation of vicious and terrorist organizations that will give to their members and initiates the absurd order and task to indiscriminately kill all of their opponents. But Cardinal Ratzinger had prudently discerned the existence of a dangerous source of spiritual narcissism in Buddhism.

III. Benedict XVI: A Pope against violence and wars

To me, this foresight was a convincing proof that Benedict XVI was truly ‘Gloria olivae’; but this would be troublesome news! In a period of proxy wars, unrestrained iniquity, and outrageous inhumanity, a perspicacious, cordial, and benevolent pope in Rome would surely be an encumbering person to many villainous rascals, i.e. the likes of Tony Blair, George W. Bush, Nicolas Sarkozy, and many others so-called ‘leaders’. The reason for this assessment of the situation is simple: no one wants a powerful pacifier at a time more wars are planned.

At the time, it was ostensible to all that a fake confrontation between the world’s Muslims and Christians was underway (notably after the notorious 9/11 events); for this reason, I expected Benedict XVI to make a rather benevolent statement that evil forces would immediately misinterpret, while also falsely accusing the pacifist Pope and absurdly turning the uneducated and ignorant mob of many countries against the Catholic Church.

This is the foolish plan of the Anglo-Zionist lobby, which has long served as puppets of the Jesuits, corrupting the entire Muslim world over the past 250 years by means of intellectual, educational, academic, scientific, cultural, economic, military and political colonialism. These idiotic puppets, which have no idea who their true and real masters are, imagine that, by creating an unprecedented havoc in Europe, they harm the worldwide interests of the Jesuits; but they fail to properly realize that this evil society, which early turned against Benedict XVI, has already shifted its focus onto China. Why the apostate Anglo-Zionist Freemasonic lodge would act in this manner against Benedict XVI is easy to assess; the Roman pontiff whose episcopal motto was ‘Cooperatores Veritatis’ (‘Co-workers of the Truth’) would apparently try to prevent the long-prepared fake war between the Muslims and the Christians.

IV. Manuel II Palaeologus and the Eastern Roman Empire between the Muslim Ottoman brethren and the Anti-Christian Roman enemies

And this is what truly happened in the middle of September 2006; on the 12th September, Benedict XVI delivered a lecture at the University of Regensburg in Germany; the title was ‘Glaube, Vernunft und Universität – Erinnerungen und Reflexionen’ (‘Faith, Reason and the University – Memories and Reflections’). In the beginning of the lecture, Prof. Dr. Ratzinger eclipsed Pope Benedict XVI, as the one-time professor persisted on his concept of ‘faith’, “which theologians seek to correlate with reason as a whole”, as he said. In a most rationalistic approach (for which he had been known for several decades as a renowned Catholic theologian), in an argumentation reflecting views certainly typical of Francis of Assisi and of Aristotle but emphatically alien to Jesus, Benedict XVI attempted to portray an ahistorical Christianity and to describe the Catholic faith as the religion of the Reason.

At an early point of the lecture, Benedict XVI referred to a discussion that the Eastern Roman Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus (or Palaiologos; Μανουήλ Παλαιολόγος; 1350-1425; reigned after 1391) had with an erudite Turkic scholar (indiscriminately but mistakenly called by all Eastern Roman authors at the time as ‘Persian’) most probably around the end of 1390 or the first months of 1391, when he was hostage at the Ottoman court of Bayezid I. In the historical text, it is stated that the location was ‘Ancyra of Galatia’ (i.e. Ankara).  

This Eastern Roman Emperor was indeed a very controversial historical figure; although undeniably an erudite ruler, a bold diplomat, and a reputable soldier, he first made agreements with the Ottomans and delivered to them the last Eastern Roman city in Anatolia (Philadelphia; today’s Alaşehir, ca. 140 km east of Izmir / Smyrna) and then, after he took control of his ailing kingdom thanks to the sultan, he escaped the protracted siege of Constantinople (1391-1402) only to travel to various Western European kingdoms and ask the help of those rather reluctant monarchs (1399-1403).

At the time, all the Christian Orthodox populations, either living in the Ottoman sultanate or residing in the declined Eastern Roman Empire, were deeply divided into two groups, namely those who preferred to be ruled by Muslims (because they rejected the pseudo-Christian fallacy, evilness and iniquity of the Roman pope) and the fervent supporters of a Latin (: Western European) control over Constantinople (viewed as the only way for them to prevent the Ottoman rule); the former formed the majority and were called Anthenotikoi, i.e. ‘against the union’ (: of the Orthodox Church with the Catholics), whereas the latter constituted a minority group and were named ‘Enotikoi’ (‘those in favor of the union of the two churches’).

V. The unknown (?) Turkic mystic interlocutor and the Islamic centers of science and reason that Benedict XVI ignored

Manuel II Palaeologus’ text has little theological value in itself; however, its historical value is great. It reveals how weak both interlocutors were at the intellectual, cultural and spiritual levels, how little they knew one another, and how poorly informed they were about their own and their interlocutor’s past, heritage, religion and spirituality. If we have even a brief look at it, we will immediately realize that the level is far lower than that attested during similar encounters in 8th- 9th c. Baghdad, 10th c. Umayyad Andalusia, Fatimid Cairo, 13th c. Maragheh (where the world’s leading observatory was built) or 14th c. Samarqand, the Timurid capital.

It was absolutely clear at the time of Manuel II Palaeologus and Bayezid I that neither Constantinople nor Bursa (Προύσα / Prousa; not anymore the Ottoman capital after 1363, but still the most important city of the sultanate) could compete with the great centers of Islamic science civilization which were located in Iran and Central Asia. That’s why Gregory Chioniades, the illustrious Eastern Roman bishop, astronomer, and erudite scholar who was the head of the Orthodox diocese of Tabriz, studied in Maragheh under the guidance of his tutor and mentor, Shamsaddin al Bukhari (one of the most illustrious students of Nasir el-Din al Tusi, who was the founder of the Maragheh Observatory), before building an observatory in Trabzon (Trebizond) and becoming the teacher of Manuel Bryennios, another famous Eastern Roman scholar.  

The text of the Dialogues must have been written several years after the conversation took place, most probably when the traveling emperor and diplomat spent four years in Western Europe. For reasons unknown to us, the erudite emperor did not mention the name of his interlocutor, although this was certainly known to him; if we take into consideration that he was traveling to other kingdoms, we can somehow guess a plausible reason. His courtiers and royal scribes may have translated the text partly into Latin and given copies of the ‘dialogues’ to various kings, marshals, chroniclers, and other dignitaries. If this was the case, the traveling emperor would not probably want to offer insights into the Ottoman court and the influential religious authorities around the sultan.

Alternatively, the ‘unknown’ interlocutor may well have been Amir Sultan (born as Mohamed bin Ali; also known as Shamsuddin Al-Bukhari; 1368-1429) himself, i.e. none else than an important Turanian mystic from Vobkent (near Bukhara in today’s Uzbekistan), who got married with Bayezid I’s daughter Hundi Fatema Sultan Hatun. Amir Sultan had advised the sultan not to turn against Timur; had the foolish sultan heeded to his son-in-law’s wise advice, he would not have been defeated so shamefully.

Benedict XVI made a very biased use of the historical text; he selected an excerpt of Manuel II Palaeologus’ response to his interlocutor in order to differentiate between Christianity as the religion of Reason and Islam as the religion of Violence. Even worse, he referred to a controversial, biased and rancorous historian of Lebanese origin, the notorious Prof. Theodore Khoury (born in 1930), who spent his useless life to write sophisticated diatribes, mildly formulated forgeries, and deliberate distortions of the historical truth in order to satisfy his rancor and depict the historical past according to his absurd political analysis. Almost every sentence written Prof. Khoury about the Eastern Roman Empire and the Islamic Caliphate is maliciously false.

All the same, it was certainly Benedict XVI’s absolute right to be academically, intellectually and historically wrong. The main problem was that the paranoid reaction against him was not expressed at the academic and intellectual levels, but at the profane ground of international politics. Even worse, it was not started by Muslims but by the criminal Anglo-Zionist mafia and the disreputable mainstream mass media, the likes of the BBC, Al Jazeera (Qatari is only the façade of it), etc.

I will now republish (in bold and italics) a sizeable (600-word) excerpt of the papal lecture that contains the contentious excerpt, also adding the notes to the text. The link to the Vatican’s website page is available below. I will comment first on the lecture and the selected part of Manuel II Palaeologus’ text and then on the absurd Muslim reaction.

VI. Excerpt from Benedict XVI’s lecture given on the 12th September at the University of Regensburg under title ‘Faith, Reason and the University–Memories and Reflections’

I was reminded of all this recently, when I read the edition by Professor Theodore Khoury (Münster) of part of the dialogue carried on – perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara – by the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both.[1] It was presumably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than those of his Persian interlocutor.[2] The dialogue ranges widely over the structures of faith contained in the Bible and in the Qur’an, and deals especially with the image of God and of man, while necessarily returning repeatedly to the relationship between – as they were called – three “Laws” or “rules of life”: the Old Testament, the New Testament and the Qur’an. It is not my intention to discuss this question in the present lecture; here I would like to discuss only one point – itself rather marginal to the dialogue as a whole – which, in the context of the issue of “faith and reason”, I found interesting and which can serve as the starting-point for my reflections on this issue.

In the seventh conversation (διάλεξις – controversy) edited by Professor Khoury, the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that surah 2, 256 reads: “There is no compulsion in religion”. According to some of the experts, this is probably one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur’an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the “Book” and the “infidels”, he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness, a brusqueness that we find unacceptable, on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: “Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”[3] The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. “God”, he says, “is not pleased by blood – and not acting reasonably (σὺν λόγω) is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats… To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death…”.[4]

The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature.[5] The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality.[6] Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazm went so far as to state that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God’s will, we would even have to practice idolatry.[7]

Notes 1 to 7 (out of 13)

[1] Of the total number of 26 conversations (διάλεξις – Khoury translates this as “controversy”) in the dialogue (“Entretien”), T. Khoury published the 7th “controversy” with footnotes and an extensive introduction on the origin of the text, on the manuscript tradition and on the structure of the dialogue, together with brief summaries of the “controversies” not included in the edition;  the Greek text is accompanied by a French translation:  “Manuel II Paléologue, Entretiens avec un Musulman.  7e Controverse”,  Sources Chrétiennes n. 115, Paris 1966.  In the meantime, Karl Förstel published in Corpus Islamico-Christianum (Series Graeca  ed. A. T. Khoury and R. Glei) an edition of the text in Greek and German with commentary:  “Manuel II. Palaiologus, Dialoge mit einem Muslim”, 3 vols., Würzburg-Altenberge 1993-1996.  As early as 1966, E. Trapp had published the Greek text with an introduction as vol. II of Wiener byzantinische Studien.  I shall be quoting from Khoury’s edition.

[2] On the origin and redaction of the dialogue, cf. Khoury, pp. 22-29;  extensive comments in this regard can also be found in the editions of Förstel and Trapp.

[3] Controversy VII, 2 c:  Khoury, pp. 142-143;  Förstel, vol. I, VII. Dialog 1.5, pp. 240-241.  In the Muslim world, this quotation has unfortunately been taken as an expression of my personal position, thus arousing understandable indignation.  I hope that the reader of my text can see immediately that this sentence does not express my personal view of the Qur’an, for which I have the respect due to the holy book of a great religion.  In quoting the text of the Emperor Manuel II, I intended solely to draw out the essential relationship between faith and reason.  On this point I am in agreement with Manuel II, but without endorsing his polemic.

[4] Controversy VII, 3 b–c:  Khoury, pp. 144-145;  Förstel vol. I, VII. Dialog 1.6, pp. 240-243.

[5] It was purely for the sake of this statement that I quoted the dialogue between Manuel and his Persian interlocutor.  In this statement the theme of my subsequent reflections emerges.

[6] Cf. Khoury, p. 144, n. 1.

[7] R. Arnaldez, Grammaire et théologie chez Ibn Hazm de Cordoue, Paris 1956, p. 13;  cf. Khoury, p. 144.  The fact that comparable positions exist in the theology of the late Middle Ages will appear later in my discourse.

VII. The problems of the academic-theological background of Benedict XVI’s lecture

It is my conviction that Benedict XVI fell victim to the quite typical theological assumptions that Prof. Dr. Ratzinger had studied and taught for decades. However, the problem is not limited to the circle of the faculties of Theology and to Christian Theology as a modern discipline; it is far wider. The same troublesome situation permeates all the disciplines of Humanities and, even worse, the quasi-totality of the modern sciences as they started in Renaissance. The problem goes well beyond the limits of academic research and intellectual consideration; it has to do with the degenerate, rotten and useless mental abilities and capacities of the Western so-called scholars, researchers and academics. The description of the problem is rather brief, but its nature is truly ominous.

Instead of perceiving, understanding, analyzing and representing the ‘Other’ in its own terms, conditions and essence and as per its own values, virtues and world conceptualization, the modern Western European scholars, researchers, explorers and specialists view, perceive, attempt to understand, and seek to analyze the ‘Other’ in their own terms, conditions and essence and as per their own values, virtues and world conceptualization. Due to this sick effort and unprecedented aberration, the Western so-called scholars and researchers view the ‘Other’ through their eyes, thus projecting onto the ‘Other’ their view of it. Consequently, they do not and actually they cannot learn it, let alone know, understand and represent it. Their attitude is inane, autistic and degenerate. It is however quite interesting and truly bizarre that the Western European natural scientists do not proceed in this manner, but fully assess the condition of the object of their study in a rather objective manner.

In fact, the Western disciplines of the Humanities, despite the enormous collection and publication of study materials, sources and overall documentation, are a useless distortion. Considered objectively, the Western scientific endeavor in its entirety is a monumental nothingness; it is not only a preconceived conclusion. It is a resolute determination not to ‘see’ the ‘Other’ as it truly exists, as its constituent parts obviously encapsulate its contents, and as the available documentation reveals it. In other words, it consists in a premeditated and resolute rejection of the Truth; it is intellectually barren, morally evil, and spiritually nihilist. The topic obviously exceeds by far the limits of the present obituary, but I had to mention it in order to offer the proper context.  

It is therefore difficult to identify the real reason for the magnitude of the Western scholarly endeavor, since the conclusions existed in the minds of the explorers and the academics already before the documentation was gathered, analyzed, studied, and represented. How important is it therefore to publish the unpublished material (totaling more than 100000 manuscripts of Islamic times and more than one million of cuneiform tablets from Ancient Mesopotamia, Iran, Canaan and Anatolia – only to give an idea to the non-specialized readers), if the evil Western scholars and the gullible foreign students enrolled in Western institutions (to the detriment of their own countries and nations) are going to repeat and reproduce the same absurd Western mentality of viewing an Ancient Sumerian, an Ancient Assyrian, an Ancient Egyptian or a Muslim author through their own eyes and of projecting onto the ancient author the invalid and useless measures, values, terms and world views of the modern Western world?

As it can be easily understood, the problem is not with Christian Theology, but with all the disciplines of the Humanities. So, the problem is not only that a great Muslim scholar and erudite mystic like Ibn Hazm was viewed by Benedict XVI and Western theologians through the distorting lenses of their ‘science’, being not evaluated as per the correct measures, values and terms of his own Islamic environment, background and civilization. The same problem appears in an even worse form, when Ancient Egyptian, Sumerian, Assyrian-Babylonian, Hittite, Iranian and other high priests, spiritual masters, transcendental potentates, sacerdotal writers, and unequaled scientists are again evaluated as per the invalid and useless criteria of Benedict XVI, of all the Western theologians, and of all the modern European and American academics.

What post-Renaissance popes, theologians, academics, scholars and intellectuals fail to understand is very simple; their ‘world’ ( i.e. the world of the Western Intellect and Science, which was first fabricated in the 15th and the 16th c. and later enhanced progressively down to our days) in not Christian, is not human, and is not real. It is their own delusion, their own invalid abstraction, their abject paranoia, and their own sin for which first they will atrociously disappear from the surface of the Earth (like every anomalous entity) and then flagrantly perish in Hell.

Their dangling system does not hold; they produced it in blood and in blood it will end. Modern sciences constitute a counter-productive endeavor and an aberration that will terminally absorb the entire world into the absolute nothingness, because these evil systems were instituted out of arbitrary bogus-interpretations of the past, peremptory self-identification, deliberate and prejudicial ignorance, as well as an unprecedented ulcerous hatred of the ‘Other’, i.e. of every ‘Other’.

The foolish Western European academic-intellectual establishment failed to realize that it is absolutely preposterous to extrapolate later and corrupt standards to earlier and superior civilizations; in fact, it is impossible. By trying to do it, you depart from the real world only to live in your delusion, which sooner or later will inevitably have a tragic end. Consequently, the Western European scholars’ ‘classics’ are not classics; their reason is an obsession; their language and jargon are hallucinatory, whereas their notions are conjectural. Their abstract concepts are the manifestation of Non-Being.

VIII. Benedict XVI’s biased approach, theological mistakes, intellectual oversights and historical misinterpretations

Benedict XVI’s understanding of the Eastern Roman Empire was fictional. When examining the sources, he retained what he liked, what pleased him, and what was beneficial to his preconceived ideas and thoughts. In fact, Prof. Dr. Papst did not truly understand what Manuel II Palaeologus said to his Turkic interlocutor, and even worse, he failed to assess the enormous distance that separated the early 15th c. Eastern Roman (not ‘Byzantine’: this is a fake appellation too) Emperor from his illustrious predecessors before 800 or 900 years (the likes of Heraclius and Justinian I) in terms of Christian Roman imperial ideology, theological acumen, jurisprudential perspicacity, intellectual resourcefulness, and spiritual forcefulness. Benedict XVI did not want to accept that with time the Christian doctrine, theology and spirituality had weakened.

What was Ratzinger’s mistake? First, he erroneously viewed Manuel II Palaeologus as ‘his’ (as identical with the papal doctrine), by projecting his modern Catholic mindset and convictions onto the Christian Orthodox Eastern Roman Emperor’s mind, mentality and faith. He took the ‘Dialogues’ at face value whereas the text may have been written not as a declaration of faith but as a diplomatic document in order to convince the rather uneducated Western European monarchs that the traveling ‘basileus’ (βασιλεύς) visited during the period 1399-1403.

Second, he distorted the ‘dialogue’, presenting it in a polarized form. Benedict XVI actually depicted a fraternal conversation as a frontal opposition; unfortunately, there is nothing in the historical text to insinuate this possibility. As I already said, it is quite possible that the moderate, wise, but desperate Eastern Roman Emperor may have discussed with someone married to a female descendant of the great mystic Jalal al-Din Rumi (namely Bayezid’s son-in-law, adviser and mystic Emir Sultan). Why on Earth did the renowned theologian Ratzinger attempt to stage manage a theological conflict in the place of a most peaceful, friendly and fraternal exchange of ideas?

This is easy to explain; it has to do with the absolutely Manichaean structure of thought that was first diffused among the Western Fathers of the Christian Church by St Augustine (in the early 5th c.). As method of theological argumentation, it was first effectively contained, and it remained rather marginal within the Roman Church as long as the practice introduced by Justinian I (537) lasted (until 752) and all the popes of Rome had to be selected and approved personally by the Eastern Roman Emperor. After this moment and, more particularly, after the two Schisms (867 and 1054), the Manichaean system of thinking prevailed in Rome; finally, it culminated after the Renaissance.

Third, Benedict XVI tried to depict the early 15th c. erudite interlocutor of the then hostage Manuel II Palaeologus as a modern Muslim and a Jihadist. This is the repetition of the same mistakes that he made as regards the intellectual Eastern Roman Emperor. In other words, he projected onto the ‘unknown’, 15th c. Muslim mystic his own personal view of an Islamist or Islamic fundamentalist. Similarly, by bulldozing time in order to impose his wrong perception of Islam, he fully misled the audience. As a matter of fact, Islam constitutes a vast universe that Prof. Dr. Papst never studied, never understood, and never fathomed in its true dimensions.

In fact, as it happened in the case of the Eastern Roman Emperor, his interlocutor was intellectually weaker and spiritually lower than the great figures of Islamic spirituality, science, wisdom, literature and intuition, the likes of Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, Al Qurtubi, Mohyi el-Din Ibn Arabi, Ahmed Yasawi, Al Biruni, Ferdowsi, Al Farabi, Tabari, etc., who preceded him by 150 to 500 years. But Benedict XVI did not want to accept that with time the Islamic doctrine, theology and spirituality had weakened.

The reason for this distortion is easy to grasp; the Manichaean system of thinking needs terminal, crystallized forms of items that do not change; then, it is convenient for the Western European abusers of the Manichaean spirit to fully implement the deceitful setting of fake contrasts and false dilemmas. But the 15th c. decayed Eastern Roman Orthodoxy and decadent Islam are real historical entities that enable every explorer to encounter the multitude of forms, the ups and downs, the evolution of cults, the transformation of faiths, and the gradual loss of the initially genuine Moral and vibrant Spirituality. This reality is very embarrassing to those who want to teach their unfortunate students on a calamitous black & white background (or floor).

All the books and articles of his friend, Prof. Theodore Khoury, proved to be totally useless and worthless for the Catholic theologian Ratzinger, exactly because the Lebanese specialist never wrote a sentence in order to truly represent the historical truth about Islam, but he always elaborated his texts in a way to justify and confirm his preconceived ideas. Prof. Khoury’s Islam is a delusional entity, something like the artificial humans of our times. Unfortunately, not one Western Islamologist realized that Islam, at the antipodes of the Roman Catholic doctrine, has an extremely limited dogmatic part, a minimal cult, and no heresies. Any opposite opinion belongs to liars, forgers and falsifiers. As a matter of fact, today’s distorted representation of Islam is simply the result of Western colonialism. All over the world, whatever people hear or believe about the religion preached by Prophet Muhammad is not the true, historical, religion of Islam, but the colonially, academically-intellectually, produced Christianization of Islam.  

Fourth, in striking contrast to what the theologian Ratzinger pretended through use of this example or case study (i.e. the ‘discussion’), if Benedict XVI shifted his focus to the East, he would find Maragheh in NW Iran (Iranian Azerbaijan) and Samarqand in Central Asia. In those locations (and always for the period concerned), he would certainly find great centers of learning, universities, vast libraries, and enormous observatories, which could make every 15th c. Western European astronomer and mathematician dream. But there he would also find, as I already said, many Muslim, Christian, Buddhist and other scholars working one next to the other without caring about their religious (theological) differences. This situation is very well known to modern Western scholarship, but they viciously and criminally try to permanently conceal it.

This situation was due to the cultural, intellectual, academic, mental and spiritual unity that prevailed among all those erudite scholars. Numerous Western European scholars have published much about Nasir el-Din al Tusi (about whom I already spoke briefly) and also about Ulugh Beg, the world’s greatest astronomer of his time (middle of the 15th c.), who was the grandson of Timur (Tamerlane) and, at the same time, the World History’s most erudite emperor of the last 2500 years. However, post-Renaissance Catholic sectarianism and Western European/North American racism prevented the German pope from being truthful at least once, and also from choosing the right paradigm.

IX. The lecture’s most controversial point

Fifth, if we now go straight to the lecture’s most controversial point and to the quotation’s most fascinating sentence, we will find the question addressed by Manuel II Palaeologus to his erudite Turkic interlocutor; actually, it is rather an exclamation:

– «Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached»!

This interesting excerpt provides indeed the complete confirmation of my earlier assessments as regards the intellectual decay of both, Christian Orthodoxy and Islam, at the time. Apparently, it was not theological acumen what both interlocutors were lacking at the time; it was historical knowledge. Furthermore, historical continuity, religious consciousness, and moral command were also absent in the discussion.

The first series of points that Manuel II Palaeologus’ Muslim interlocutor could have made answering the aforementioned statement would be that Prophet Muhammad, before his death, summoned Ali ibn Abu Taleb and asked him to promise that he would never diffuse the true faith by undertaking wars; furthermore, Islam was diffused peacefully in many lands outside Arabia (Hejaz), notably Yemen, Oman, Somalia, and the Eastern Coast of Africa. In addition, there were many Muslims, who rejected the absurd idea of the Islamic conquests launched by Umar ibn al-Khattab and actually did not participate.

We have also to take into consideration the fact that, in spite of the undeniable reality of the early spread of Islam through invasions, there has always been well-known and sufficient documentation to clearly prove that the Aramaeans of Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine, the Copts of Egypt, and the Berbers of Africa, although fully preserving their Christian faith, preferred to live under the rule of the Caliphates and overwhelmingly rejected the Eastern Roman imperial administration, because they had been long persecuted by the Constantinopolitan guards due to their Miaphysite (Monophysitic) and/or Nestorian faiths.

On another note, the Eastern Roman Emperor’s Muslim interlocutor could have questioned the overall approach of Manuel II Palaeologus to the topic. In other words, he could have expressed the following objection:

– «What is it good for someone to pretend that he is a follower of Jesus and evoke his mildness, while at the same time violently imposing by the sword the faith that Jesus preached? And what is it more evil and more inhuman than the imposition of a faith in Jesus’ name within the Roman Empire, after so much bloodshed and persecution took place and so many wars were undertaken»? 

Last, one must admit that the sentence «Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new!» would have been easily answered by an earlier Muslim mystic of the Golden Era of Islam. Actually, this statement is islamically correct and pertinent. The apparent absence of a spectacular response from the part of Manuel II Palaeologus’ Muslim interlocutor rather generates doubts as regards the true nature of the text. This is so because he could have immediately replied to Bayezid I’s hostage that not one prophet or messenger was sent by God with the purpose of ‘bringing something new’; in fact, all the prophets from Noah to Jonah, from Abraham to Jonah, from Moses to Muhammad, and from Adam to Jesus were dispatched in order to deliver the same message to the humans, namely to return to the correct path and live according to the Will of God.

Related to this point is the following well-known verse of the Quran (ch. 3 – Al Imran, 67): “Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian but he was (an) upright (man), a Muslim, and he was not one of the polytheists”. It is therefore odd that a response in this regard is missing at this point.

It is also strange that, at a time of major divisions within Christianity and more particularly among the Christian Orthodox Eastern Romans, the ‘unknown’ imperial interlocutor did not mention the existing divisions among Christians as already stated very clearly, explicitly and repeatedly in the Quran. Examples:

“You are the best community ever raised for humanity—you encourage good, forbid evil, and believe in Allah. Had the People of the Book believed, it would have been better for them. Some of them are faithful, but most are rebellious”. (ch. 3 – Al Imran, 110)

“Yet they are not all alike: there are some among the People of the Book who are upright, who recite Allah’s revelations throughout the night, prostrating in prayer”.

(ch. 3 – Al Imran, 113):

To conclude I would add that elementary knowledge of Roman History, Late Antiquity, and Patristic Philology would be enough for Benedict XVI to know that

– in its effort to impose Christianity on the Roman Empire,

– in its determination to fully eradicate earlier religions, opposite religious sects like the Gnostics, and theological ‘heresies’ like Arianism,

– in its resolve to exterminate other Christian Churches such as the Nestorians and the Miaphysites (Monophysites),

– in its obsession to uproot Christian theological doctrines like Iconoclasm and Paulicianism, and

– in its witch hunt against Manichaeism, …

… the ‘official’ Roman and Constantinopolitan churches committed innumerable crimes and killed a far greater number of victims than those massacred by Muslim invaders on several occurrences during the early Islamic conquests.

So, when did the Christian Church encounter Reason and when did it cease to be ‘unreasonable’ according to the theologian Pope Ratzinger?

One must be very sarcastic to duly respond to those questions: most probably, the Roman Church discovered ‘Reason’ after having killed all of their opponents and the so-called ‘heretics’ whose sole sin was simply to consider and denounce the Roman Church as heretic!

If Benedict XVI forgot to find in the Quran the reason for the Turkic interlocutor’s mild attitude toward the hostage Manuel II Palaeologus, this is a serious oversight for the professor of theology; he should have mentioned the excerpts. In the surah al-Ankabut (‘the Spider’; ch. 29, verse 46), it is stated: “And do not argue with the followers of earlier revelation otherwise than in a most kindly manner”.

Similarly, the German pope failed to delve in Assyriology and in Egyptology to better understand that the Hebrew Bible (just like the New Testament and the Quran) did not bring anything ‘new’ either; before Moses in Egypt and before Abraham in Mesopotamia, there were monotheistic and aniconic trends and traits in the respective religions. The concept of the Messiah is attested in Egypt, in Assyria, and among the Hittites many centuries or rather more than a millennium before Isaiah contextualized it within the small Hebrew kingdom. Both Egypt and Babylon were holy lands long before Moses promised South Canaan to the Ancient Hebrew tribes, whereas the Assyrians were the historically first Chosen People of the Only God and the Assyrian imperial ideology reflected this fact in detail. The Akkadian – Assyrian-Babylonian kings were ’emperors of the universe’ and their rule reflected the ‘kingdom of Heaven’.

If Etana and Ninurta reveal aspects of Assyrian eschatology, Horus was clearly the Egyptian Messiah, who would ultimately vanquish Seth (Satan/Antichrist) at the End of Time in an unprecedented cosmic battle that would usher the mankind into a new era which would be the reconstitution of the originally ideal world and Well-Being (Wser), i.e. Osiris. There is no Cosmogony without Eschatology or Soteriology, and nothing was invented and envisioned by the Hebrews, the Greeks and the Romans that had not previously been better and more solemnly formulated among the Sumerians, the Akkadians – Assyrian-Babylonians, and the Egyptians. There is no such thing as ‘Greco-Roman’ or ‘Greco-Christian’ or’ Greco-Judaic’ civilization. Both, Islam and Christianity are the children of Mesopotamia and Egypt.

And this concludes the case of today’s Catholic theologians, i.e. the likes of Pope Benedict XVI or Theodore Khoury; they have to restart from scratch in order to duly assess the origins and the nature of Christianity before the serpent casts “forth out of his mouth water as a river after the woman, that he may cause her to be carried away by the river”. All the same, it was certainly Prof. Ratzinger’s full right to make as many mistakes as he wanted and to distort any textual reference he happened to mention.

X. The educational-academic-intellectual misery and the political ordeal of today’s Muslim states

Quite contrarily, it was not the right of those who accused him of doing so, because they expanded rather at the political and not at the academic level; this was very hypocritical and shameful. If these politicians, statesmen and diplomats dared speak at the academic level, they would reveal their own ignorance, obscurantism, obsolete educational system, miserable universities, nonexistent intellectual life, and last but not least, disreputable scientific institutions.

The reason for this is simple: not one Muslim country has properly organized departments and faculties endowed with experts capable of reading historical sources in the original texts and specializing in the History of the Eastern Roman Empire, Orthodox Christianity, Christological disputes and Patristic Literature. If a Muslim country had an educational, academic and intellectual establishment similar to that of Spain or Poland, there would surely be serious academic-level objection to Benedict XVI’s lecture. It would take a series of articles to reveal, refute and utterly denounce (not just the mistakes and the oversights but) the distorted approach which is not proper only to the defunct Pope Emeritus but to the entire Western academic establishment; these people would however be academics and intellectuals of a certain caliber. Unfortunately, such specialists do not exist in any Muslim country.

Then, the unrepresentative criminal crooks and gangsters, who rule all the countries of the Muslim world, reacted against Pope Benedict XVI at a very low, political level about a topic that was not political of nature and about which they knew absolutely nothing. In this manner, they humiliated all the Muslims, defamed Islam, ridiculed their own countries, and revealed that they rule failed states. Even worse, they made it very clear that they are the disreputable puppets of their colonial masters, who have systematically forced all the Muslim countries to exactly accept as theirs the fallacy that the Western Orientalists have produced and projected onto them (and in this case, the entirely fake representation of Islam that theologians like Ratzinger, Khoury and many others have fabricated).

If Ratzinger gave this lecture, this is also due to the fact that he knew that he would not face any academic or intellectual level opposition from the concerned countries. This is so because all the execrable puppets, who govern the Muslim world, were put in place by the representatives of the colonial powers. They do not defend their local interests but execute specific orders in order not to allow

– bold explorers, dynamic professors, and impulsive intellectuals to take the lead,

– proper secular education, unbiased scientific methodology, intellectual self-criticism, free judgment, and thinking out of the box to grow,

– faculties and research centers to be established as per the norms of educationally advanced states, and

– intellectual anti-colonial pioneers and anti-Western scholars to demolish the racist Greco-centric dogma that post-Renaissance European universities have intentionally diffused worldwide.

That is why for a Muslim today in Prof. Ratzinger’s lecture the real problem is not his approach or his mistake, but the impermissible bogus academic life and pseudo-educational system of all the Muslim countries. In fact, before fully transforming and duly enhancing their educational and academic systems, Muslim heads of states, prime ministers, ministers and ambassadors have no right to speak. They must first go back to their countries and abolish the darkness of their ridiculous universities; their so-called professors are not professors.

Here you have all the articles that I published at the time in favor of Benedict XVI; the first article was published on the 16th September 2006, only four days after the notorious lecture and only one day after the notorious BBC report, which called the Muslim ambassadors to shout loud:

https://www.academia.edu/24775355/Benedictus_XVI_may_not_be_right_but_todays_Muslims_are_islamically_wrong_By_Prof_Muhammad_Shamsaddin_Megalommatis

https://www.academia.edu/24779064/What_Benedict_XVI_should_say_admonishing_Muslim_Ambassadors_by_Prof_Dr_Muhammad_Shamsaddin_Megalommatis

https://www.academia.edu/24779960/Can_Benedict_XVI_bring_Peace_and_Concord_-_by_Muhammad_Shamsaddin_Megalommatis

https://www.academia.edu/24778178/Lord_Carey_Benedictus_XVI_and_todays_decayed_Islam_Prof_Dr_Muhammad_Shamsaddin_Megalommatis

https://www.academia.edu/25317295/Benedict_XVI_between_Constantinople_and_Istanbul_by_Prof_Muhammad_Shamsaddin_Megalommatis

https://www.academia.edu/25317609/Benedictus_XVI_between_Istanbul_and_Nova_Roma_-_by_Prof._Muhammad_Shamsaddin_Megalommatis

Related articles published in 2005 and 2013:

https://www.academia.edu/43053199/Muslims_welcoming_Third_Jewish_Temple_on_the_Temple_Mount_Israel_2005

Muslims welcome the election of Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio as Pope Francis I

About Benedict XVI:

https://www.focus.de/politik/ausland/papst/benedikt-xvi-prof-dr-papst_id_1505077.html

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

https://gloria.tv/share/1txNGosD4V3UCWBEP9N3umNbu

https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/la/speeches/2013/february/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20130211_declaratio.html

The Oldest Popes in History

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

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

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

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

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_XII#Archbishop_and_papal_nuncio

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

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

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

https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2005/august/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20050820_vigil-wyd.html

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

https://www.osservatoreromano.va/en/news/2021-11/ing-047/to-be-cooperatores-veritatis.html

http://www.fondazioneratzinger.va/content/fondazioneratzinger/en/news/notizie/_cooperatores-veritatis–lomaggio-della-fondazione-ratzinger-per.html

A-Dio Benedetto XVI (1927-2022)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI#Islam

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI_and_Islam#Concerning_the_Islam_controversy

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

(audio recording) https://www.horeb.org/xyz/podcast/papstbesuch/2006-09-12_Vortrag_Uni_Regensburg.mp3

(in German) https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/de/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg.html

 (in English) https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg.html

15 September 2006: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5348456.stm

17 September 2006: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5353208.stm

About Manuel II Palaeologus:

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

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ala%C5%9Fehir

https://www.tertullian.org/fathers/manuel_paleologus_dialogue7_trans.htm

Seventh Dialogue: chapters 1–18 only (of 26 ‘Dialogues’)

https://books.google.ru/books?id=Ax8RAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=ru#v=onepage&q&f=false  (starting page 125)

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

https://islamsci.mcgill.ca/RASI/BEA/Shams_al-Din_al-Bukhari_BEA.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maragheh_observatory#Nasir_al-Din_al-Tusi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasir_al-Din_al-Tusi

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

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

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

About the Dzungar Buddhist extremists:

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

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

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakh%E2%80%93Dzungar_Wars

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dzungar%E2%80%93Qing_Wars

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

 ————————————

Download the obituary in PDF:

benedict-xvi-and-todays-muslims-opposite-manuel-ii-palaeologus-and-his-turkic-interlocutorDownload

Kushitic Oromos’ Ancestry in Ethiopia (: Ancient Sudan) & Semitic Amharas’ & Tigrays’ (Abyssinians’) Ancestry in Yemen

The following text is a response sent to an email dispatched to me by the Chairman of the exiled Oromo Parliamentarians who struggle for the Independence and Self-determination of the 5 millennia long Kushitic Ethiopian Nation of the Oromos.

The Hamitic – Kushitic Oromo Nation – due to criminal, inhuman and evil persecution conceived by the colonial powers (France, England and America) and executed by the colonially promoted barbaric and incestuous pseudo-Christian Abyssinians – lost their kingdoms and were engulfed within the Cemetery of Nations Fake Ethiopia, which consists in the world’s most tyrannical realm and the location of the world’s more abhorrent, more enduring, and more multifaceted genocides. There are more than 45 million Oromos in Abyssinia (Fake Ethiopia) and Kenya today, despite the notorious and pathetic falsehood propagated by Wikipedia. 

The present text enumerates all the major points of historical distortion and falsification carried out and diffused by the colonial academia, mass media, and diplomats, as well as by their local agents and criminal executioners, i.e. the barbaric, incestuous and Anti-Christian tribes of Amhara and Tigray (: the Abyssinians), who usurped the fair name of Ethiopia, which historically denotes the land of North Sudan and the Kushitic Nation that prospered there either in the Antiquity or in the Christian Era. Both, the Oromos and the Arabic-speaking (but not Arab) populations of Northern-Central Sudan are the descendants of Ancient Sudan’s (i.e. Ancient Ethiopia’s) Kushitic populations.

Representative photographic documentation was herewith added to the text in order to better illustrate the topic.

Refutation of historical forgeries propagated by European colonials and incestuous Abyssinians

Dear Chairman,

Thank you for your email and news!

I never watch or hear anything produced by the BBC because I know quite well that they have systematically distorted History either they present programs about Asia or they feature Africa, Europe or America.

Thanks to your email, I noticed that this video is not the actual documentary but an announcement for mere publicity.

But it is true that Axum was an Abyssinian capital, and it had nothing to do with Kush/Ethiopia, which was located at the time in the area of today’s North Sudan.

 

Ancient Sudan, as the true Ethiopia (or Kush), and its great past

Kush/Ethiopia was a millennia-long civilization; its three main periods of rise cover the three main stages:

1) Kerma Civilization (2300-1500 BCE),

(Kerma Deffufa, North Sudan)

2) Napata/Karima Civilization (which is mainly called Kushitic Civilization: 800 – 400 BCE) and

Napata (Karima & Jebel Barkal, North Sudan)

3) Meroe/Bagrawiyah Civilization (which is mainly called Meroitic Civilization and corresponds to what Ancient Greeks & Romans called ‘Ethiopia’: 400 BCE – 350 CE).

Meroe, Capital of Ethiopia (Kush: North Sudan)

Mussawarat as Sufrah, a major city of the Meroitic Kingdom of Ethiopia in North Sudan

Wad ben Naga, a major city of the Meroitic Kingdom of Ethiopia in North Sudan

Naqa, a major city of the Meroitic Kingdom of Ethiopia in North Sudan

Kush/Ethiopia has ethnic, linguistic and cultural affinities with Kemet/Egypt, because both nations are Hamitic, like the Berbers (who are all the people living from Libya to Morocco), the Tuareg, the Haussa, and others. In fact, ancient Egyptian and Sudanese (:Ethiopian) civilizations were deeply intertwined and for the Ancient Egyptians the holiest place in the world was Napata (today’s Karima in North Sudan) as the original location of god Amon of Thebes (Luxor)!

((Beware! All Wikipedia articles contain truth and lies mixed in a sophisticated manner as per the French-English-American needs. Plus: there was never such thing as a “Nubian Civilization”; there were Nubians in both Kemet/Egypt and Kush/Ethiopia, but they never developed an independent civilization, nor did they form a separate state. Only in Christian times, there was a separate state called Nobatia, which existed for several centuries. When people speak of “Nubian pyramids” in today’s Sudan, either they are ignorant and uneducated or they forge History deliberately usurping the History that belongs to present day Sudanese and Oromos and which is Kushitic/Ethiopian of nature, and not Nubian))

Axumite Abyssinia: a late, tiny state of Yemenite settlers in Africa

Axum, Capital of the Kingdom of Abyssinia (covering Pre-Christian and Christian times)

Ancient blocks with Yemenite Sabaean inscriptions from Yeha

Totally unrelated to the above was the formation of a small state around Yeha and Axum (Abyssinia) from Semtic, Yemenite settlers, who crossed the Red Sea in later ages. Yeha must have been built around the 3rd-2nd c. BCE and Axum around the 2nd-1st c. BCE, so they belong to the third (3) stage of Ancient Kushitic Civilization as per above. Earlier dates given for these settlements are academic dishonesty due to extensive bribery of scholars, which is – as you already know – a regular practice among the various dictatorial governments, Amhara- or Tigray-led, of Addis Ababa. Example: this article contains numerous deliberate errors and falsehood – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%CA%BFmt

In fact, Axum was a Yemenite kingdom on African soil; they were not Africans and for their entire pre-Islamic History, they were more concerned with Yemen than with Africa. However, despite all the lies that the Abyssinian governments and agents diffuse, the ancient Axumites had nothing in common with the Queen of Sheba (who lived around the 10th c. BCE in Yemen, when no Yemenite was on African soil). Sheba (Sabaa / Sabaeans) was actually the name of one of the most important Yemenite states; other important states were Qataban, Himyar, Awsan and Hadhramaut.

Marib, Capital of the Yemenite Kingdom of Sheba / Sabaa (Sabaeans)

Awam Temple – Yemenite Kingdom of Sheba / Sabaa (Sabaeans)

Zafar, Capital of the Yemenite Kingdom of Himyar (Himyarites)

Antiquities from Timna, Capital of the Yemenite Kingdom of Qataban

Shabwah, Capital of the Yemenite Kingdom of Hadhramaut

Antiquities from Shabwah, Capital of the Yemenite Kingdom of Hadhramaut

The Abyssinians (Habasha), who crossed the Red Sea and settled in Africa, were already mentioned in the Ancient Yemenite (Sabaean) texts as a renegade tribe (Abasat), and we have every reason to understand that they were expelled from their country of origin due to their heresy and evilness.

Meroe (Ethiopia) – Axum (Abyssinia) – Yemenite Sheba & Himyar – Berberia (Sudan’s coast) – The Other Berberia & Azania (Somalia’s coast)

The Axumite Abyssinians formed indeed a small state (limited between Axum and Adulis/near Massawa) and they never reached ever up to the area of Avalites (Assab) near the Red Sea straits. On the contrary, the two Yemenite states Sheba & Himyar merged and they controlled the entire Somali coast from the Horn of Africa down to today’s Daresalaam. This vast coast was a Yemenite colony for several centuries (perhaps up to a millennium at the times of early Islam), and it was named Azania (according to the Ancient Greek text Periplus of the Red Sea, which is also known as Periplus of the Erythraean Sea and was written in the middle of the 1st c. CE: around the years 70-75 CE).

Adulis (near Massawa, the only harbor of Axumite Abyssinia), Foundations of Christian Church

The same text gives details about Meroe, which was a big continental state with links across Sahara and with Roman Egypt, but did not control today’s Sudanese coast where – according to the same text – lived the ‘Berbers’ (Kushites who were rather independent from Meroe); for this reason that coast was called Berberia.

Same origin population lived in the coast from Avalites (Assab) to the Horn itself (so the area that today corresponds to Eritrea’s southernmost part, Djibouti, Somaliland, and a small part of Puntland); that’s why in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, the area from Assab to the Horn is named as “The Other Berberia” – something that also highlights the Kushite presence in that area. Beyond the Horn, the populations were Kushitic as well: the ancestors of today’s Somalis. Simply, the term ‘Azania’ (used within the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea) seems to have rather been a ‘political’ term to designate the Yemenite (Sheba/Himyar) colony across the East African coast.

Christian Ethiopian states on Sudan’s territory & Axumite Abyssinia

Axum accepted Christianity in the early 4th c. CE. According to vicious Amhara/Tigray propaganda, Axum was ‘the first Christian state in the world’; this is a lie. The first Christian state in the world was Osroene (an Aramaean state located on part of the territory of today’s Northern Syria and Southeastern Turkey): King Abgar the 9th of Osroene (179 – 214 CE) accepted Christianity as the official religion of his country – more than 150 years before King Ezana of Axum accepted Christianity after the Aramaean Syrian Frumentius (slave, missionary, bishop) preached Christianity there. The state of Osroene was indisputably the first Christian state in the world, and in addition to the above, there are discussions about King Abgar the 8th of Osroene being eventually the King to have Christianized Osroene earlier and about King Abgar the 5th of Osroene being eventually the King to have exchanged letters with Jesus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abgar_V).

After Ezana made Axumite Abyssinia a Christian country, in coordination with the Christian Roman authorities in Alexandria and Constantinople, he attacked Meroe/Ethiopia (around 360 CE) and destroyed its capital at today’s Bagrawiyah. He then retreated after annexing the occupied territory. He then claimed that he was king of Axum and king of Ethiopia, like every other king who after invading a new land was considered to be king of that land.

However, Meroe/Ethiopia was a vast state covering most of today’s Northern Sudan’s territory. Ezana attacked Meroe’s capital from the south (probably advancing alongside Atbarah river) but the territory of Ethiopia that was occupied by Abyssinia’s Ezana was less than 20% of Ethiopia’s total area.

The claim was ridiculous and it would be tantamount to Hitler claiming to be the ruler of Soviet Union in 1942, because he only invaded part of its western territory.

However, the Abyssinian annexation of 20% of Ethiopia’s (Kush’s) territory did not last for long, and as early as the beginning of the 5th c. CE (so around the period 400-450 CE) Christian Nobatia rose in the Kushitic / Sudanese / Ethiopian North. Slightly later, a second Christian state, Makuria was formed in the Kushitic / Sudanese / Ethiopian mainland of the old Meroitic kingdom. Not much later, Christian Alodia, the third Christian Kingdom of Kush / Ethiopia / Sudan, appeared in the area around today’s Khartoum.

((There are many correct and many wrong points here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobatia / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makuria / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alodia)) Mainly, take into consideration that it is wrong to depict as ‘Nubian’ any other Christian kingdom of Kush / Sudan / Ethiopia except Nobatia. The population of Makuria and Alodia was Kushitic/Ethiopian, i.e. the descendants of the non-Christian Meroitic kingdom’s population.

Archaeological evidence makes it clear that all Meroitic sites were vastly depopulated after Ezana’s invasion of the small southern portion of Meroe / Ethiopia. For the rest of the 4th c. and the 5th c. CE Kush’s (Ethiopia’s) mainland in today’s North Sudan was depopulated. I interpreted this phenomenon as the massive Exodus of the ancestors of Oromos, who wanted to avoid the forced Christianization of their land and therefore left that land to find safe shelter further in the South, until they finally reached – after several steps – the highlands of today’s Oromia:

https://www.academia.edu/24273923/The_Meroitic_Ethiopian_Origins_of_the_Modern_Oromo_Nation_-_By_Prof._Dr._Muhammad_Shamsaddin_Megalommatis

However, when the Amhara / Tigray Abyssinians use the name ‘Ethiopia’ for the country that they formed after their colonial expansion and the genocides that they perpetrated in the period 1850-1950, they forget that Ezana’s claim was politically empty (since he did not invade but only a small portion of Ethiopia) and historically void, because ‘Christian Ethiopia’ as historical term defines the three Christian Kingdoms of Nobatia, Makuria and Alodia, and not the small kingdom of Axum, which collapsed after the arrival of Islam during the 7th c., whereas Christian Makuria survived until ca. 1400 CE and Christian Alodia existed until 1510-1520. This means that there was Christian continuity in Sudan / Ethiopia / Kush, but not in Abyssinia.

Fresco from the Cathedral of Faras, Capital of the Christian Kingdom of Nobatia

Fresco from the Cathedral of Faras, Capital of the Christian Kingdom of Nobatia

Fresco from the Cathedral of Faras, Capital of the Christian Kingdom of Nobatia

Old Dongola (Dunqulah), Capital of the Christian Ethiopian Kingdom of Makuria, North Sudan

Old Dongola (Dunqulah), Capital of the Christian Ethiopian Kingdom of Makuria, North Sudan – Fresco of the Adoration of the Magi

Christian Ethiopian Art & Inscription from the Ethiopian Kingdom of Makuria, North Sudan 

Major expansion of Alodia, the third (and southernmost) Kingdom of Christian Ethiopia (: Sudan)

Soba (Khartoum), Capital of the Christian Ethiopian Kingdom of Alodia – foundations of one of the main churches

Tombstone of the Christian Ethiopian King David, Soba (Khartoum) – Capital of Alodia

Axum Abyssinia, Agaw Kushite Kingdom, and Yekuno Amlak’s Satanic state

Almost 300 years after the disappearance of Axum, around 950 CE, in the northern part of today’s Abyssinia, the tiny Christian Agaw state was formed with Lalibela as capital and it lasted until 1270; however this was also a Kushite kingdom because the Agaw Nation is of Kushitic ethnic background. A lot of posterior traditions due to evil colonial motives have obscured the historical reality around the Agaw kingdom, but you can be sure for the following:

Lalibela, Capital of the Christian Kushitic Kingdom of Agaw in the southern extremities of the Old Abyssinian Kingdom of Axum

a. The Agaw Kingdom had no royal or ethnic connection with / continuity from Axum; all opposite claims and mentions of intermarriage are fake. The Semitic descendants of the Axum kingdom were surely among the Agaw kingdom’s subjects, but they did not belong to the ruling royal elite; they were one of the nations that lived under the Agaw scepter and we have reason to believe that they hated it too much.

Agaw kingship is totally unrelated to the posterior barbaric state launched by Yekuno Amlak. Pictorial documentation demonstrates the Kushitic identity of the Christian Kingdom of Agaw. The blood of the brave last King of the Agaw Kingdom is a curse for the Amhara & Tigray Abyssinians, heralding their total extinction.

b. The Agaw state was a small Kushitic Christian kingdom that never claimed royal or ethnic descent from the Semitic, Yemenite kingdom of Axum and never claimed to be ‘Ethiopia’ – because at those days the Ethiopian kingdoms were Nobatia, Makuria (which merged soon afterwards into one state), and also Alodia.

c. There was indeed a religious continuity between Axum and Agaw kingdoms.

d. There was never an Axumite Abyssinian text to support an eventual claim of royal Axumite descent from the Queen of Sheba & Solomon. Not one Axumite Abyssinian king ever made such a claim.

e. The Semitic Abyssinian Amhara state that was launched by Yekuno Amlak in 1270 has no royal connection with either the Axum or the Agaw kingdoms.

f. The Semitic Abyssinian Amhara state has indeed an ethnic connection with the Semitic descendants of the Axum kingdom; one part of them represents a rather direct descent from the Axumite population (Tigray), whereas the other part is characterized with a certain amalgamation with other populations (Amhara).

This state consisted in a racist entity and an oppressive mechanism against all the non-Amhara and non-Tigray subjects of its territory.

g. In striking contradiction with the Axum and the Agaw kingdoms, the barbaric state launched by Yekuno Amlak at 1270 was never a real kingdom (and much less, an empire, as the Amhara and Tigray Abyssinians have fallaciously pretended), because

i) there was not a dynastic continuity to properly ensure a real royal descent (if the so-called ‘king’ is not the son, grandson, brother, uncle, cousin or nephew of a king, if he does not even belong to the noble class, i.e. the peerage, but has a common or low descent, he can never be a king) and

ii) – more importantly – there is no notion of ‘family’ in the incestuous Amhara society, which means that there cannot be proper ‘royal’ family to offer heads of states possibly able be called ‘kings’ or ’emperors’. The sons of different lowly prostitutes who were ‘married’ to several men can never become ‘kings’ by any standards anytime anywhere in the world. That’s why the Oromo, the Hadiya, the Somali, the Kaffa and other real African kings never accepted those trashy, vulgar, incestuous Amhara or Tigray barbarians as ‘kings’ and never conceded to several demands for a ‘royal’ meeting (: a king never encounters a filthy trash like the Amhara – Tigray bogus-kings).

h. What is more unknown to most people worldwide is that there is not even religious continuity between the Axum and the Agaw kingdoms on one side and the state of Yekuno Amlak on the other side. Post-1270 ‘Christianity’ among the Amhara – Tigray incestuous tribes has nothing in common with either the Lalibela-centered Agaw Christianity or the Axum-based Old Abyssinian Christianity.

The reason is simple; with the proclamation of Yekuno Amlak’s villainous and atrocious state, a new text of fake royal propaganda appeared, ‘Kebra Negast’, which was accepted by the Abyssinians down to Haile Selassie as the epitome of the state’s nature, claims and aspirations. The book accepts Christianity in an heretic manner whereas it distorts all the basic principles of Christian morality. Furthermore, Kebra Negast propagates a great number of Anti-Christian concepts, Satanic theories, counterfeit ideas, historical fallacies, dynastic forgeries, and factual distortions that make it totally impossible for anyone accepting this text to properly be a Christian.

This is the reason the Amhara and the Tigray Abyssinian rulers never accepted Christian Catholic missionaries in their marginal, arid, tiny and ill-fated bogus-kingdom, and they always slaughtered them mercilessly. During the period 1300-1850, more Catholic priests were killed in the then tiny territory of Abyssinia than in any other part of the world, the Islamic Caliphate and other Islamic Empires included.

Two different Abyssinian claims to the Name of Ethiopia: Ezana’s and Haile Selassie’s

Finally, one must clearly make a distinction between Ezana’s claim to the title of ‘king of Ethiopia’ and the recent Abyssinian policies (that date back only to 1950s) and false pretensions that Abyssinia can be possibly called ‘Ethiopia’, which consist in sheer usurpation of a name that is totally unrelated to the Amhara and Tigray Abyssinians and their past.

King Ezana’s inscription – the Greek text

King Ezana’s claim was something normal as practice at those days. Example: Publius Cornelius Scipio was a Roman general and later consul who is often regarded as one of the greatest generals and military strategists of all time. His main achievements were during the Second Punic War (218 – 201 BCE) where he is best known for defeating Hannibal at the final battle at Zama, one of the feats that earned him the agnomen Africanus. Because he won over the African state of Carthage, he was called Scipio the ‘African’.

However, when the Abyssinian control of the small part of Ethiopian (Sudanese) territory ended few decades later and Nobatia, Makuria and Alodia rose to prominence as the three Christian states on the Ethiopian (e. g. North Sudanese) territory, any Axumite Abyssinian claim to the name of Ethiopia was purely void, fully insignificant, and practically meaningless.

As a matter of fact, the modern claim is rather relevant to Anti-Christian eschatological and messianic beliefs introduced among the Abyssinians only with the aforementioned forgery of Kebra Negast, a text that can be considered as Christian as the devious Jewish forgery of ‘Talmud’ can be described as Biblical Hebrew!

“Ethiopia shall hasten [to stretch out] her hand readily to God“

The eschatological and messianic beliefs introduced among the Abyssinians are based on a Biblical text of the Old Testament (Psalms, 67:32) in which the Septuagint Greek text reads “ἥξουσι πρέσβεις ἐξ Αἰγύπτου, Αἰθιοπία προφθάσει χεῖρα αὐτῆς τῷ Θεῷ”, which is translated in Modern English “Ambassadors shall arrive out of Egypt; Ethiopia shall hasten [to stretch out] her hand readily to God”. (http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/septuagint/chapter.asp?book=24&page=67)

{{Here I must add that you must never use the false English translation prepared by the evil, bastard and Freemason king of England James I (reign: 1603 – 1625), the so-called King James Version – KJV – because it is part of the same Satanic conspiracy that brought the Amhara and the Tigray Abyssinian invaders to your lands and provided for the 150-year long Oromo Genocide and many other genocides of subjugated African nations across Abyssinia and elsewhere. This extremely distorted translation (King James Version / KJV) serves only to diffuse confusion and falsehood and to promote the enslavement of all the nations of the world to Satan and all the filthy and evil spirits. King James I was an evil person and an accomplished Satanist, who took even the pain of writing a book titled “Daemonologie”, which is “a philosophical dissertation on contemporary necromancy and the historical relationships between the various methods of divination used from ancient Black magic. This included a study on demonology and the methods demons used to trouble men while touching on topics such as werewolves and vampires”. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemonologie) You understand, of course, that whoever diffuses the words of filthy spirits and evil demons cannot possibly be involved in the holy texts of any religion, except for the purpose of falsifying them as per the guidance given to him by the evil spirits which he serves. With reference to modern English translations of the Christian Bible, beware also of many other fake English translations that repeat the same mistakes of KJV which is not a correct and direct translation from the Ancient Greek text but from a late Jewish forgery, the so-called masoretic text of which the earlier manuscript dates back only to 9-10th c., namely more than 1000 years after the Greek text of the Hebrew Bible! More: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10035a.htm / But this is all mistaken: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretic_Text}}

Now, why was the verse “Ambassadors shall arrive out of Egypt; Ethiopia shall hasten [to stretch out] her hand readily to God” thought to be of eschatological and messianic meaning?

A Kushitic Ethiopian Prince from Meroe & Ancestor of the Oromos speaks with Philip, one of Jesus’ disciples

This is due to the fact that there is a reference in the New Testament (Acts, 8:26-40) according to which there was an ‘Ethiopian’ prince, who while traveling in Palestine met and spoke with Philip, one of Jesus’ disciples (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_the_Apostle), and then accepted Jesus’ preaching and became Christian.

Here you have the entire narration: “26 And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert. 27 And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship, 28 Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet. 29 Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. 30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? 31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him. 32 The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth: 33 In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth. 34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man? 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. 36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. 39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing. 40 But Philip was found at Azotus: and passing through he preached in all the cities, till he came to Caesarea”. (http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/new-testament/acts/8.asp)

An ancestor of the Oromos accepted Jesus centuries before the ancestors of the Amhara and Tigray Abyssinians

Miniature painting depicting Jesus’ disciple Philip and the Meroitic Ethiopian prince who accepted Jesus’ preaching and was baptized. From the Menologion of the Eastern Roman Emperor Basil II, which was compiled around the year 1000 – currently in the Vatican Library. (More: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menologion_of_Basil_II)

So, the historical forgers interpret the earlier verse (Psalms, 67:32) as being a prophecy that was materialized in the person of the Ethiopian prince. As you can understand, this concerns Kush / Sudan, i.e. the Kingdom of Ethiopia with Meroe as capital which was located in today’s North Sudan. Even more so because the New Testament excerpt includes a typically Meroitic / Ethiopian word, namely Kandake (Candace), which is not a personal name, but the title itself (lit. ‘queen’) in Meroitic / Ethiopian language. This article is correct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kandake

We also know, thanks to Meroitic / Ethiopian textual documentation, that the title ‘King’ in Ancient Meroitic / Ethiopian was ‘Qore’ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_monarchs_of_Kush). This Kushitic word has been preserved down to our times in Af Somali as ‘Boqor’ (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_aristocratic_and_court_titles).

Meroitic/Kushitic/Sudanese/Ethiopian Candace: Unrelated to Abyssinians

The use of the term ‘Candace’ makes the proof even stronger that the earlier Biblical text (Psalms) prophesied indeed the Christianization of Sudan / Kush / Ethiopia, first in the form of the traveling prince, and second, few centuries after the travel of the Ethiopian Meroitic prince in Palestine, when Nobatia, Makuria and Alodia became the three Christian states of Sudan/Ethiopia.

Abyssinia in any form (Axum or posterior) is totally unrelated to this story, and tiny Axum at the time was a non Christian country and remained as such for another 300 years! No Axumite Abyssinian prince traveled to Palestine at the times of the Apostles (Jesus’ disciples) and of course, there was no Candace/Kandake in Axum at those days or any time later!

The Abyssinian claim may look absurd. But this is always the nature of forgery! When evil people and barbaric nations like the Amhara / Tigray Abyssinians try to usurp the Past and the History of civilized nations, they raise false claims and come up with incredible misinterpretations that only criminals or paranoids dare express.

Last but not the least, the whole affair of the recent claim (which started with Haile Selassie in the 1950s) involves Westerners (colonial French academia), who then convinced the fake king Haile Selassie about using the name of Ethiopia instead of Abyssinia. This has a lot to do with Freemasonic and Zionist plans and conspiracies regarding Eastern Africa; however this is rather politics and not History.

A Sudanese-Oromo alliance to overthrow the genocidal Abyssinian tyranny

The best chance for the Oromos to counterbalance and overthrow the colonial conspiracy against their nation is to
1. reach out to today’s Arabic-speaking people and rulers of Sudan,
2. help them realize that
a. they are not Arabs, but linguistically Arabized Kushites of Sudan
b. they are straight descendants of the Ancient Sudanese / Kushites / Ethiopians
c. as such they are the truly fraternal nation to the Oromos
d. the real offspring of the Ancient Sudanese / Kushites / Ethiopians are both, the Oromos (who left their land but preserved and saved their language) and the Arabic-speaking Sudanese (who preserved their land but lost their own language)
e. the real name of their land (Sudan) and of Oromia is Ethiopia / Kush and that you and they must take it back from the Abyssinians
f. the Arabization project across Africa and Asia was conceived by the three colonial powers (France, England and America) that are controlled by Freemasonry and Zionism in order to destroy the nations to which it was projected and on which it was imposed (from Morocco to Iraq), and this is the reason for all the problems and disasters that fell on each of those nations, and
g. the only means of survival of today’s Sudan is the detachment from the fallacy of Pan-Arabism and the return to the true historical identity (Kushitic – Ethiopian) that their land had for millennia, and
3. establish an Oromo – Sudanese alliance to overthrow the tribal tyranny of the Abyssinians who consist in a minority within the colonial state of Fake Ethiopia.

Best regards,
Shamsaddin

 

The Medes will not return! The Freemasonic Forgery of a ‘Kurdish Nation’ and the US False Christians

How Historical Falsifications Go Viral

By Prof. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis

Ancient Medes, their Precarious Empire, and the Historical Truth

Few remember today the Ancient Medes, one of the Iranian nations that rose to prominence in the Ancient Orient when, making an alliance with the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar, managed to eliminate the few remaining Assyrian garrisons from the abandoned heartland of the Assyrian Empire and, with his Babylonian ally, divide the greatest empire that had grown in the then 2500 years old History of the Mankind. The Median Empire flourished under king Cyaxares (625 – 585 BCE), known as Umakishtar to Assyrians and Babylonians and as Uvak-shatra to Medes and Persians; today, his name in English is derived from the Ancient Greek deformation of the Assyrian-Babylonian name.

Modern maps reflecting political needs of the colonial powers are the result of the forgery of Freemasonic and Zionist Orientalists, who are payed (: bribed) to write what is convenient for those who spread animosity, enmity, fratricidal wars, and bloody conflicts; that’s why these maps show a huge empire of Media stretching from today’s Central Turkey to …. Kyrgyzstan ( ! ). These maps are entirely false. Media was smaller than Babylonia. It certainly spanned from Central Turkey to Central Iran, but neither Fars (today’s Iran’s south) nor Khorasan (today’s Iran’s northeast) were controlled by Cyaxares – let alone territories further to the east.

Map forgery carried out to portray the Median Empire more than double of what its was in historical reality

Made by paranoid, hysterical and heinous pseudo-Christians, Zionists and Freemasons – who quite shamefully revile personally, and fill their sick hearts with great hatred against, the illustrious Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar who turned the tiny and worthless state of Judah to ashes, transporting  its entire population captive to Babylonia -, these fake maps only help these pseudo-Christians implement their odium by dramatically reducing the demarcated Babylonian borderlines as much as possible ( !! ). It sounds childish and sick, but it is true; these forgers of Ancient Oriental History do therefore their ingenious best to deliver a minimalistic view of Babylonia stretching only between today’s southern Iraq and Palestine. That’s absolutely false and totally ridiculous.

The last (and weakest) Babylonian king Nabonidus’ second palace was located nowhere else than in Tayma, an oasis not far from Yathribu, which is the Assyrian-Babylonian name of Yathrib, the pre-Islamic name of Medina. In fact, it was not a matter of the last Babylonian King. For almost two centuries before Nabonidus, the successive Assyrian Sargonid Emperors and Babylonian Nabonid Kings controlled the northern half of the Arabian Peninsula and received tribute from the vassal Yemenite states of the peninsula’s southern confines.

This is a brief excerpt from a scholarly, albeit summarizing, presentation of the archaeological evidence in Aramaic (administrative language of the Neo-Babylonian kingdom) that was unearthed in the area:

“Aramaic was probably introduced into North Arabia as an official written language by the last king of Babylon, Nabonidus. In 553 BC, he conquered Taymāʾ, Dadan (modern al-ʿUlā), Yathrib (modern Medina) and three other oases on the frankincense route and stayed at Taymāʾ for 10 years. Since Imperial (or Official) Aramaic was the administrative language of the Neo-Babylonian empire, it would almost certainly have been used by Nabonidus’ officials in Taymāʾ, though we know that some of them could also write in Taymanitic, and some fragmentary cuneiform inscriptions from this period have also been found in the excavations. After Nabonidus returned to Babylon in 543 BC, it appears that Imperial Aramaic remained one of the written languages at Taymāʾ and seems gradually to have displaced Taymanitic”. (from: OCIANA – Online Corpus of the Inscriptions of Ancient North Arabia / http://krc.orient.ox.ac.uk/ociana/index.php/home/155-english/home/aramaic-scripts-of-north-arabia/355-the-aramaic-scripts-of-north-arabia).

Introductory readings can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tayma / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabonidus / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nabonidus_Chronicle / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cylinders_of_Nabonidus

To continue about Cyaxares, we know quite well that his capital was located at Ecbatana (Hangmatana in Old Achaemenid Persian), which is today’s Hamadan (NW Iran), and that the Median capital was protected by seven concentric walls. However, the Medes were a very small people, and the fact that they controlled an already large (for their capacities) territory did not bode well for the future of the newly risen kingdom. Their homeland constituted a minimal portion of the territory they controlled, and north of Media was located Atropatene (Azerbaijan) that stretched from the Middle Zagros Mountains to Caucasus and the Caspian Sea. With a multitude of nations under their control in Anatolia (today’s Turkey) in the west and with a rising strong Persian kingdom in the southeast of their country, the Medes could not last long due to the total lack of homogeneity in their territory, and to the weakness of their traditions. When Cyaxares died fighting against Lydia in the west, it became clear that the days of Media were numbered.

Ganj-e Nameh inscriptions from Hamadan (Ecbatana) in Old Achaemenid Persian, dating back from the reigns of Darius and Xerxes – not the earlier Median times

Hamadan – 16th c. map (Matrakçı Nasuh)

And truly, few decades later, Cyaxares’ granddaughter Mandane’s son, the Persian King Kurosh (Cyrus) – thanks to the mixed marriage of his father – united once forever Media and Persia (550 BCE), only to subsequently add other Iranian plateau territories (through suppression of minor rulers), Eastern Anatolia (already a Median territory), the kingdom of Lydia (Western Anatolia), and more importantly, Babylonia itself in 539 BCE. There is an enormous literature available in different ancient sources (Babylonian, Old Achaemenid Persian, Ancient Greek, Latin, Hebrew) about Cyrus whereby historical truth is perplexedly intertwined with legends, involving a great deal of eulogy and mythologizing. But the Median Empire’s only posterior memory is to be retraced in the Achaemenid Persian Empire of Iran. The Ancient Greeks may have called their wars with the Iranian Empire (which are today conventionally called ‘the Greco-Persian Wars’) ‘τά Μηδικά’ (the Median affairs), but in reality, there were only few thousands of Medes fighting in South Balkan lands in the early 5th c. BCE.

There has not been found even one inscription in Median language thus far, and it is quite possible that the mother tongue of king Cyaxares was actually never written. The only pre-Achaemenid inscription unearthed thus far is written in Assyrian-Babylonian cuneiform, which is quite normal because the western half of Iran was integral part of the Sargonid Empire (722 – 609 BCE) at least until the end of Ashurbanipal’s reign (669 – 625). What is reconstructed by modern linguists, epigraphists, philologists and historians as Median language is just a list of unusual occurrences in Old Achaemenid Persian inscriptions that are considered loanwords from the Median.

This is the brief diagram of the historical reality as known to us through an objective, neutral, and unbiased reconstruction of the Antiquity on the basis of philological and archaeological evidence.

Ancient Medes: totally Unrelated to Different Modern Nations that have been criminally Baptized as ‘Kurds’

Now from this point up to making of Cyaxares the …. ancestor of many – different from one another – nations that live today from Zagros Mountains (in the borders between Iran and Iraq) to the eastern plains of Syria to the Antitaurus Mountains (SE Turkey) there is as much distance as between the serious and the ridiculous.

In a previous article and video-presentation (http://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2014/09/07/there-is-no-kurdish-nation-it-is-a-freemasonic-colonial-orientalist-hoax/ – http://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2014/09/19/there-is-no-kurdish-nation-unmasking-an-orientalist-fabrication-able-only-to-generate-conflicts/ – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKJh-6bdGFk), I demonstrated that there is no Kurdish Nation, and that the collective appellation, which has been given in Arabic (Akrad) to the – different from one another nations – that live in the aforementioned geographical area, and which is translated in Modern English as ‘Kurds’, cannot be considered as the ethnic name of one nation, due to the tremendous racial, linguistic, religious, and cultural differences that exist among the different ethno-religious entities regrouped under this appellation.

The vicious plan providing for a state named ‘Kurdistan’ was conceived by French, English and American Orientalists, and other Freemasonic agents, politicians and diplomats, and the entire preparation has lasted decades. In the process, for the fake nation, a fake historicity was sought after, and the result ended with the usurpation of the Median past and heritage, which was conveniently and suitably attributed to the past-less ‘Kurds’, who certainly cannot have one common past and heritage, because they are not one nation but many.

Even worse, all these different modern nations (Kurmanji, Zaza, Sorani, Gorani, Hawrami, Faili, Yazidi, Ahl-e Haq to name only the major ethno-religious groups among those who are fallaciously named ‘Kurds’) do not have written monuments in their respective languages (which are of course different from one another) that go beyond 500-600 years. Before that level, all these modern nations are known through very few references in other languages (Arabic, Farsi, Turkish, Azeri, Armenian, Syriac Aramaic, Georgian), but the scarce textual evidence is not enough to duly reconstruct their past. Earlier mentions in ancient languages (Latin, Ancient Greek, Old Achaemenid Persian, and even Assyrian-Babylonian) are even scarcer and cannot help us understand whether they all refer to the same ethnic group or different.

We cannot conclude whether the Assyrian-Babylonian ‘Zikurtu’, the Old Achaemenid Persian ‘Asagartiya’, the Ancient Greek ‘Kardouhoi’, the Ancient Roman ‘Cyrtii’ and the land known as Gordyene in Ancient Greek and Latin have anything to do

a) with one another, and/or

b) with one of the modern Kurmanji, Zaza, Sorani, Gorani, Hawrami, and Faili – the main ethno-linguistic groups that are mistakenly called altogether as ‘Kurds’.

Attributing to these disparate ethnic elements an almost totally undocumented past (the Median heritage) is purely absurd and testifies only to extremely vicious and even criminal needs of distortion and falsification. In fact, the Medes did not have any posteriority after the end of the Achaemenid Empire and its substitution by the ephemeral empire of Alexander the Great. The term ‘Media’ was shrunken into a merely geographic description; the Medes were certainly assimilated to the Atropatene Azeris and/or to Persians, and no Median cultural identity can be traced in any possible way during the subsequent periods of Seleucid (312 – 63 BCE), Arsacid (250 BCE – 224 CE) and Sassanid (224 – 651 CE) rule.

The Ludicrous Usurpation of the Median Past by bogus-Kurdish Nationalists – agents of the Intelligence Service

The story of this purely childish effort can make every saddened heart explode in laughter. At the very beginning of the falsehood about a hypothetical connection between the extinct ancient nation of the Medes and the non existent nation of the ‘Kurds’, one finds an unfortunate Iraqi Sorani young man who died under mysterious circumstances (most probably assassinated by the English secret services because he knew ‘too much’ of their internships and projects, while failing to keep his mouth closed) and in very young age and after never having studied History. This is Yûnis Reuf (1918–1948), who is widely known through his pen name Dildar (an Indian name that no Sorani Iraqi would have ever imagined to use it for himself because simply no one knew in Iraq this name at that time – and actually before being used as pen name, this name was his code name among the English secret services agents and diplomats who were those who made the name known to his silly bearer). Yûnis Reuf was a naive, idealistic, enthusiastic, daydreaming, and rather romantic youngster who failed to identify the criminal minds and the heinous hearts that were hidden behind the smiley faces of the Baghdad-based English gangsters, i.e. all those who befriended him for a while (before poisoning him – which occurred only after they extracted from him what they intended to duly utilize for their ignominious purposes). Born in Koy Sanjaq, near Suleymaniyeh, ‘Dildar’ studied Law in Baghdad, and there he was picked up by the English agents who used to include in their payroll youngsters originating from different ethnic background as tools for their nefarious and evil colonial rule that brought about the destruction that we have attested in the ancient land of Mesopotamia over the past decades.

Qyzqapan (near Sulaymaniyah, North Iraq). The rock-hewn tomb that bears no inscription and cannot therefore be identified may be Median, Persian, Azeri or other. It became however a matter of great speculation when the Soviet Assyriologist Prof. Diakonov suggested that it is probably a royal tomb and that if it is royal it is the tomb of Cyaxares.

During the period he is referred to as imprisoned (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dildar), he was in fact interned, and then he attended various seminars offered to duly selected audience by distinct members of the perfidious and criminal, colonial elite including Max Mallowan, the Assyriologist and archaeologist who happened also to be the husband of Agatha Christie.

During this process of falsehood indoctrination (I should say intoxication), he was told all the irrelevant points of which he made the cornerstones of his misplaced, baseless and futile ‘nationalism’. Ideas of a ‘Kurdish’ past related to the Medes (of whom he had never heard before) were deleteriously instilled into his ignorant mind, while his youthful and innocent enthusiasm was criminally exploited in a way to make him deliver in Sorani poetry what the English wanted the Soranis to be stupid enough to believe.

The rest was easy. ‘Dildar’ composed in Sorani (there is no ‘Kurdish’ language) the silly and heinous pseudo-poem Ey Reqib, and his colonial masters – happy that after 20 years of murderous, illegal presence on Ottoman territory they had in their dirty hands at last a useful document written by a naive, idiotic and therefore easily manipulated local youngster – managed within no time that the ‘poem’ was accepted by their other ‘Kurdish’ stooges as a ‘national anthem’ of the bogus-Kurdish nation that they intended to create. More about the fake anthem of the bogus nation can be read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ey_Req%C3%AEb

Simple philological analysis can prove that the ‘poem’ is not a normal national anthem. National anthems reflect the identity of one nation or the aspiration of one people at a particular moment. In striking contradiction with what a national anthem is or can be, this ‘poem’ defines the supposed nation for which it is written as per their imaginary opponent! Ey Reqib (which is both the title and the first verse) in Sorani means ‘oh enemy’. The pathetic verses of the pseudo-poem constitute a series of affirmations so viciously Freemasonic of content that certainly not one Sorani, Gorani, Zaza, Kurmanji, etc. would dare accept. Through English treachery, mendacity, and perfidy, people who have nothing in common as ethno-religious groups are made to believe that (as one verse states) “Kurdistan is our religion”. This is a shame and an abomination for every Muslim, Yazidi or Ahl-e Haq (the main religions among all these different nations of which the villainous gangsters of the Freemasonic lodges intend to make one monstrous ‘Kurdish’ fabrication).

In the worthless text, which comprises of just 20 verses, the sentences “Let no one say Kurds are dead, they are living. They live and never shall we lower our flag” are repeated five times, being thus half of the rather short ‘anthem’!

However, in the fourth stanza, it is stated in Sorani that “Ême roley Mîdya u Keyxusrewîn”. This is the first time the word Mîdya is written or said in Sorani, because no local had studied Orientalism and Iranology until that time in order to come across with this ancient nation which is not mentioned in Arabic, Farsi, Turkish and Azeri literature – let alone the literature of the indigenous Sorani, Gorani, Zaza, Kurmanji, etc.

It is really cute to notice that the naive boy that composed the worthless verse did not even bother to localize in his native language the previously unknown to him, English name of the ancient kingdom, and so ‘Media’ was merely transliterated into Mîdya without the slightest effort of an eventual localization – Midistan, etc.!

Translated in English, this verse reads: “We are the descendants of Media and Keykhosrow”. However, in the conventionally accepted and diffused, false English translation of the Sorani verse, ‘Media’ is replaced by ‘Medes’. This is an enormous falsification, because ‘the descendents of Media’ can mean in general the heirs of earlier civilizations developed by other nations on the same land, which poses no problem as it can be a normal case of cultural historicity. Quite contrarily to this, the false translation presents today’s bogus-Kurds as the offspring of the Ancient Medes, which is absolutely wrong and absurd.

What is really comical as falsification and, at the same time, demonstrates how fake the whole effort is can be attested in the false translation of the verse’s last word, e.g, the name Keykhosrow (‘Keyxusrewîn’).

Who is Keykhosrow?

Modern Iranian imaginative painting. Departure of Kaykhosrow’s mother and grandmother toward Iran. (Kai Khosrow is seen with the old man in the middle)

Conventionally written in English as Kai Khosrow or Kay Khosrow, the legendary king is attested in Iranian and Azeri literature that goes as back as the 10th c. CE and reflects views over the origins of the Central Asiatic civilization, namely an heroic era of mythical kings, of their deeds of their and exploits, at a historically undefined time, when prevalence, superiority and sovereignty was vindicated by both, Turks and Persians, who – according to the narrative – are in fact the offspring of the same royal family.

Certainly, this heroic king’s name was not invented in the 10th c. CE as it is attested in earlier texts and even in the Avesta. But the Avestan term Kavi Husravah does not mean any legendary king but the ideal, primordial concept of fame. In other words, within different religious-cultural backgrounds the same name takes diverse connotations – Zoroastrian, Zendist, Mazdeist, etc., and the latest connotation is the Islamic Iranian one within which the earlier concept of fame is merely personified as a famous king.

Reading and interpreting epic poems like the famous Shahname by Ferdowsi (10th c. CE) is totally out of the limits of the present article, but here we have to stress the point that there are several different compositions and narratives of the same epic circle and they all reflect varied interpretations, Azeri / Turkic or Persian, of the common, Central Asiatic heritage and past that these nations had recorded  to have had. One must add at this point that the epic circle in and by itself demolishes the modern linguists’ long venerated assumption of a division between two distinct ethno-linguistic groups, namely the Indo-European and the Uralo-Altaic (or Turco-Mongolian); however, this is a different topic.

Armies of Iran, led by Key-Khosrow, and of Turan, under the command of Afrasiab. From a miniature included in the Bayasanghori Shâhnâmeh, made in 1430 for Prince Bayasanghor (1399–1433)

On the other hand, one must specify that the consideration of ‘Iran’ as a matter of Persian history, homeland, nation, language, culture and civilization is only the result of Western Orientalist and Iranologist biases. Of course, this forgery was subsequently utilized by Persian nationalists, who turned the Iranian Empire into a nationalist monarchy under the pseudo-dynasty of Pahlavi, but this consists in a typical nationalistic nonsense. Iran is equally Azeri / Turkic and Persian, and the full proof for this is demonstrated by the fact that several Seljuk (Turkish) Sultans were also named Kay Khosrow. In fact, different narratives and diverse interpretations of the same heroic era heritage were equally appropriated by Azeris / Turks and Persians.

About the legendary king, introductory information can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kai_Khosrow / http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Literature/Shahnameh/keykhosrow.htm

About the three Seljuk Turkish historical kings, basic info can be read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaykhusraw_I / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaykhusraw_II / http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaykhusraw_III

A last point that I would like to add to the aforementioned is that it is not only for the name Kay Khosrow that a) the aforementioned set of the existing different connotations as per diverse religious context and b) the Azeri / Turkish – Persian polarization can be encountered. Other names, like Kay Kaus, Kay Qubad, etc. present respective parallels at both levels, a and b – each involving several different connotations (Zoroastrian, Zendist, Mazdeist, etc.) and the said polarization.

– What is the relation that Kay Khosrow may have with the Soranis and the other nations that the Western colonial forgers regroup under the name of ‘Kurds’?

– Ethnically – racially none, but culturally great!

The mention of Kay Khosrow in the few childish verses composed by ‘Dildar’ to be selected by the English colonials, and by their idiotic pseudo-‘Kurdish’ stooges, as ‘Kurdish’ national anthem (Ey Reqib) reveals only the following points:

1. there was a tremendous cultural impact, exercised on two axes, namely a) Seljuk – Ottoman (Turkish) over the Kurmanji and the Zaza and b) Timurid – Safavid – Afhar – Zend – Qajar (Iranian, so partly Persian and partly Azeri / Turkish) over the Sorani and the Gorani
2. there was a sheer identification of the diverse small nations (that today’s colonials attempt to portray them as one and independent ‘Kurdish’ nation) with the common Turkish – Azeri – Iranian historical and mythical national background,
3. there was an evident overwhelming appropriation of Turkish – Azeri – Iranian concepts, values and virtues, ideals, prototypes and paradigms for the social-behavioral and cultural life’s needs of these marginal mountainous nations that did not have a significant heritage of their own, and
4. Turkish – Azeri – Iranian concepts, values and virtues, ideals, prototypes and paradigms prevailed even in the minds of those selected in Iraq by the English colonials as their own tools as recently as the middle of the 20th c.

Now, it is high time for me to unveil why I started my article by expanding briefly on Cyaxares, the only significant king of the Ancient Medes. The reason is that the UK-US bribed, fake Kurdish gangsters, who – in Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran – promote the fake Kurdish nationalism and demand an independent Kurdistan, have been ‘taught’ by their secret Western masters to posture as the descendents of Cyaxares!

– What is their proof?

The false English translation of the verse of the fake national anthem Ey Reqîb that refers to Kay Khosrow!

The Sorani verse “Ême roley Mîdya u Keyxusrewîn” was falsely translated in English as “We are the descendants of the Medes and Cyaxares” (see Wikipedia link above), and this is presented by the idiotic thugs of the fake Kurdish nationalism, the likes of Talabani and Barzani, as the ‘proof’ of their supposedly Median ancestry.

Why do I specify that these idiotic thugs and gangsters have been taught all this fallacious nonsense by their Freemasonic / Zionist masters?

Simply because not one Sorani or Kurmanji specialized in Old Achaemenid Persian (cuneiform), Ancient Greek, Latin and Hebrew to have thus direct access to original sources and subsequently form a correct view of the specific historical period to which it is impossible to establish any link for themselves and their resolutely non-Median past.

All the bribed fake Kurdish nationalists repeat therefore the lies and the falsehood that the incestuous Freemasonic tyrants, diplomats and agents of France, England, Holland, Canada, America and Australia and the inhuman beasts of the fake, Anti-Jewish state of Israel order them to say, although it is very well known that all their instructions are false and that ‘Key Khosrow’ cannot possibly be translated as ‘Cyaxares’!

Fake Christians propagating the Anti-Christian, Satanic Falsehood

It would however be wrong to imagine that the pathetic and ignorant fake Kurdish thugs are the only victims to have been misled and deceived through the Satanic poison that the Anti-Christian rulers of the Freemasonic – Zionist tyrannies of the West have systematically and incessantly diffused. There are many millions of Western fake Christians who are equally or even worse victimized. How? By unquestionably accepting the aforementioned falsehood as truth and by trying to adjust it to their evil ministries and childish teachings.

Scores of ‘pastors’, ‘ministers’ and other ignorant commentators – of all sorts of heretical backgrounds involving Protestant, Evangelical, Baptist, Anabaptist, Pentecostal, Methodist and other villainous deviations – ‘inform’ their supposedly Christian, but genuinely unsuspicious, naive and gullible readership about the plans of their criminal and Satanic elites that these pseudo-Christian ‘ministers’ serve by deceitfully presenting these plans as godly of origin (which is a foremost sin) and as supposedly prophesied across their misinterpreted Bibles!

Their followers, all those who accept the filthy scam, are being used by the ruling Freemasonic – Zionist, Satanic elites of America, France, England and their allies. By accepting this falsehood, sizable Christian populations are demotivated from scrupulously examining the Christian or Anti-Christian character of their rulers’ deeds, plans and policies and thus remain inactivated, pathetic and lethargic, which in turn eliminates obstacles and reactions from the path of their rulers towards establishing a global Satanic state of falsehood and distortion.

Even worse, the devilish ‘pastors’ and ‘ministers’, by identifying the Satanic policies and deeds of the Western rulers with supposedly Biblical prophecies and with the will of God, force their followers into slavery and submission to Satan, as they – by rejecting the historical truth and deeply plunging into ignorance – directly oppose Jesus’ order “Γνώσεσθε τὴν ἀλήθειαν, καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια ἐλευθερώσει ὑμᾶς” (Vulgata:  “et cognoscetis veritatem et veritas liberabit vos” / English: And shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free – from John 8:32).

You probably don’t know Jack Kelley; you certainly don’t miss much. This ignorant and uneducated person found it necessary to compose a nonsensical article under title ‘The Return of the Medes’ (http://gracethrufaith.com/end-times-prophecy/the-return-of-the-medes/). The article starts with a fake map of an otherwise non existent country, ‘Kurdistan’. Not even in their wildest dreams did the fake Kurdish thugs and gangsters (who are closely guided controlled by the Satanic organizations CIA and the Mossad) dare to imagine that such a big bone would be thrown to them! Fake, non-existent Kurdistan is depicted in extraordinary dimensions on this forged map in order to look as vast as the precarious Median Empire!

Map forgery included in the ridiculous, false article published by the False Prophet Jack Kelley

Do you know what exactly the Anti-Christian gangster Jack Kelley does by suggesting the formation of a fake this big?

He heralds the butchery of the Oriental Christians of Urumiyeh, Salmas, Miandoab and other locations in Iran who are presented as forthcoming subjects of the fake Kurdish state, since all these cities and the surrounding territories of the Iranian provinces of West and East Azerbaijan have been included in the fictional state that Jack Kelley’s criminal masters want to set up. To serve his Satanic masters, the inhuman beasts of the CIA and the Mossad, this false preacher does not give a damn about the fate of the true Christians – which in and by itself is the best proof that he is a Satanist impersonating the Christian priest. I can already see Aramaean Christian blood in Jack Kelley’s hands because, if such an evil state is formed, the Christians will be the first targeted by the fake Kurdish nationalists and their lawless militias.

This silly person, who never attended the first hour of a first year course in History of Ancient Iran, repeats the hereby refuted falsehood of the Median ancestry of the non-existent Kurdish nation (“The Kurds are the modern descendants of the Medes”) in his trashy text, which is full of stupid mistakes, nonsensical assumptions, and deliberate distortions. In fact, every line of his text is full of mistakes.

Example: “The Medes, an Indo-European people who were joined by the Persians in their successful effort to overthrow Babylon and establish themselves as a world power in the 6th century BC”!

This pathetic and dangerous liar ignores that the Medes were not joined by the Persians in any effort against Babylon, simply because the Persians merged with Media by means of mixed royal marriage of Cyrus’ father, and that the unification of the two kingdoms (Media and Persia) took place more than a decade before Iran attacked Babylonia.

Why does this ludicrous Kelley man want to desperately include the Medes in the invasion of Babylonia which was undertaken exclusively by the Persians under Cyrus? The reason is simple. The Western pseudo-Christians’ and Satanists’ ‘art’ of impressing innocent and naive Western Christian readership involves the establishment of parallels between a misinterpreted past and a falsely prophesied future. Scores of villainous gangsters, who incessantly, purposefully and mercilessly kill Christians’ souls – through lies, systematic falsehood, and multilevel deception – insist on ‘inventing’ prophetic parallels in past events and teach their otherwise unsophisticated audiences that what happened in the past was an archetypal form of crucial events that ‘will’ happen at the End of Times. In fact, they commit a double forgery; they misinterpret several excerpts from prophetic – apocalyptic texts, then they deliberately falsify the past events as per their needs, and at the end, they establish the parallelism, thus uttering their bogus-prophecies!

Concerning the ludicrous assumption of a double Median-Kurdish (past and future) Anti-Babylonian action, Jack Kelley’s paranoid forgery involves the following 3-step argumentation and the ensuing conclusion:

1. The Medes overthrew Babylonia (which is proven wrong).

2. The Medes are the ancestors of the ‘Kurds’ (which is proven wrong).

3. So, the ‘Kurds’ will overthrow Babylonia at the End of Time.

– That’s why the West should help ‘Kurds’ setup their state, so that they later overthrow …. Babylonia (that does not exist anymore, but the idiotic author makes a laughable effort to resuscitate it!!).

What does Jack Kelley does not say?

He does not confess that he intends to write another ‘article’ in the future, and similarly ‘prove’ to his unfortunate readership that today’s ‘Babylonia’ is Islam or Turkey or Saudi Arabia and that the ‘allegorical’ notion of the Biblical term has been meanwhile ( ! ? ) transferred to Istanbul, Medina, Mecca or any other place whereby his shadowy masters and payers may order him to locate it!!

So, unrelated to the Medes and non-existent as one nation, the fake Kurds are ‘prophesied’ by this vicious liar to become “God’s agency for the never before fulfilled judgment against Babylon at the End of the Age”. And although ‘Babylon’ is a metaphor within Biblical and Christian prophetic texts (so, totally unrelated to any possible ‘state’, past or future), the miserable and idiotic liar Jack Kelley tries to identify it with the location of the ancient Mesopotamian city!!

This is a brief part of his toxic text: “Those who say the restoration of Babylon will require billions of dollars and many years have not considered that its preparation has been under way for several years now. For example, if you take a close look at the dimensions and capabilities of the US embassy in Baghdad you will see how easily it could be converted into a world governmental headquarters. With a compound covering 104 acres, it is the largest and most expensive embassy in the world, and is nearly as large as Vatican City. Babylon is only about an hour away by car.

In addition, one of Saddam Hussein’s palaces sits on a hill overlooking ancient Babylon and has been completely restored as a hotel and tourist destination. It could easily house the anti-Christ and his entourage.  And there are several large military installations nearby as well.  In short, preparing Babylon to become the capitol of the world won’t take anywhere near as long as most people think.  And remember, this is Satan’s city on Earth”.

Do you want to know how it will all end?

False Prophet Jack Kelley has it ready for you in his McDonald’s style ‘prophecy’: “Through the Kurds, the Medes have stepped out of history and onto the world stage once again, and another player in the End Times Scenario is taking its place. One day soon, the King of the Medes will again lead a vast army against Babylon, and this time her destruction will be complete, and the Lord’s words will be fulfilled”. Absolute nonsense and deliberate forgery for which Jack Kelley will be deservedly thrown in the bottomless pit.

So, now you understand that, when you read in Matthew 24:4 “Βλέπετε μή τις ὑμᾶς πλανήσῃ” (Vulgata: “videte ne seducamini ” – English: See that no one mislead you), you know that Christians have already been ordered to reject the vicious fallacy of Jack Kelley.

Where does Jack Kelley’s mistake lie?

His reading of the Biblical and Christian texts is very superficial, schematic, immoralist and materialistic. He views these texts, which are above all reflecting moral standards and principles, eternal values and virtues, as simple mechanical tools able to be adjusted to his dirty heart’s vicious plans and desires that are all materialistic of nature. There is no spirituality and there is no morality in the Biblical texts in the way he reads them. I will terminate my article with an example. His worthless text starts with a Biblical excerpt referring to the Ancient Medes (the true ones, who are unrelated to today’s fake Kurds).

This is the Biblical text’s English translation that he has chosen: “See, I will stir up against them the Medes, who do not care for silver and have no delight in gold. Their bows will strike down the young men; they will have no mercy on infants nor will they look with compassion on children. Babylon, the jewel of kingdoms, the glory of the Babylonians’ pride, will be overthrown by God like Sodom and Gomorrah. She will never be inhabited or lived in through all generations; no Arab will pitch his tent there, no shepherd will rest his flocks there”. (Isaiah 13:17-20)

This text should not be taken as historically wrong because it mentions Medes and not Persians destroying Babylon; the selection of the ethnic names by scribes, translators and copyists in the Antiquity reveals several times a preference for a certain archaic style, and one has to take into consideration that the Septuagint (the 72 scholars), who translated from Biblical Hebrew to Ancient Greek the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), delivered their work to Pharaoh Ptolemy II in Alexandria 250 years after the Persian invasion of Babylonia (539 BCE). Even more so because the Achaemenid Empire of Cyrus had already ceased to exist in their time, following the conquests of Alexander the Great that took place at least 50 years before the Jewish scholars traveled to the Mediterranean city where they worked on this project in a royal facility made available to them at the island of Pharos.

However, the first sentence of the text is a key for us to understand the moral standards involved in Hebrew god’s decision to use a nation against another as chastisement. The Medes, as per the text, “do not care for silver and have no delight in gold”. This sets a very specific contextualization of how things like that can happen. The Medes are described as fully disinterested in materialistic goods, because even the two most precious metals of those days did not attract their attention.

This irrevocably concludes the case of the corrupt mind and worthless text of the False Prophet Jack Kelley. Even if today’s fake nation of the so-called ‘Kurds’ had been a true nation (and not a collective appellation of many different nations that evil colonial interests want to put together in the next ‘fratricidal’ scheme), even if today’s ‘Kurds’ as a hypothetically one nation had been the latest offspring of the Ancient nation of the Medes (which is certainly not the case), today’s ‘Kurds’ – in order to be eventually used again by the Hebrew god for the role that the ignorant author pretends that they will play – would have obligatorily reflected the same moral principles, concepts, values and virtues as those attributed by the Biblical text to the Ancient Medes (meant by the Septuagint translators as ‘Persians’).

Anyone who lives in our world knows that the fake Kurdish nationalists and their thuggish leaders, who are the puppets of France, England, America and Israel, are lewd and villainous persons of exclusively materialist interests of the lowest sort. These are the gangsters who killed scores of Iraqi Turkmen in order to ensure some millions of petrodollars for their filthy bank accounts and disreputable pockets. These are the inhuman beasts who can let others (particularly the Christian Aramaeans) die if this is the way their Satanic masters order them to act (they did so in Mosul where they had the time to prepare for battle when they first got the news of the ISIS plan – but their CIA / Mossad masters ordered them to abstain from any involvement). These are the masters of corruption, perversion, and lawlessness; they sell drugs wherever they settle and they manage their illegal business of human trafficking which has marked an extraordinary growth over the past 11 years. They feel no moral compunction to perform the most monstrous deeds for a handful of dollars. Only a False Prophet would find in them the tool of his god, but this lower god’s name would be Satan. And the False Messiah that a False Prophet like Jack Kelley expects is only the Antichrist (Masih Dajjal) and none else.

The very bad news for America’s fake Christians and False Prophets is that a genuine interpretation of sacred texts reflecting moral values cannot be undertaken by people who find it normal to live in a genocidal country that has systematically and mercilessly persecuted the indigenous population of the occupied territories for more than two centuries in the most abominable manner.

Truth and Faith do not permit a country to have Wall Street or Federal Reserve. If there are true Christians in America, their only possible target is the immediate rejection of the Satanic tyranny that has been imposed on them and on their forefathers since Day 1 the cursed Freemasonic – Zionist state was incepted.