To the serbs

[Kushiel]

I know I am a new poster, and hence might not be taken so seriously, but although i have no heritage there, Serbia is a land i feel very strongley about, stemming from my first year in high school. Over half the school i went to (I have moved schools because my friends went to another school, just about finish high school) was black muslim (somalian, eritrean ect.) or arab. Anyway, a couple of months into my first year of school there was some muslim kids who tried to give me [censored], calling me "Jew-pig and zionist-motherf**ker" and pushing me around, but on the third day of this, as i got into school, a bunch of serbian guys a few years above me who I didn't even know greeted me, taught me how to fight properley and told the muslims in no uncertain terms to get lossed. They told me that muslims tried to give them a hard time when they started too.

Essentially i would like to say thanks to every serbian who has taken [censored] from muslims, damn im bad with words 

[DALMACIJA]

Welcome Jewish comrade,

Well Serbs and Jews are brothers that is a fact.

But you will be surprised how many other people (Catholics and Muslims) can also be good to you.
We must not put all people of a certain religion/ nation in the same corner with fascists or terrorists.
Generalizing is not Christian behavior and reminds us to fascism.
We must not use methods of our enemies, because that will eventually destroy us. You can not fight Nazis with Nazism or terrorists with terrorism.

[Kushiel]

You are correct on this, i have known some catholics and muslims who are good, but i use the word muslim in this storie to refer to a particular gang at the school who where only muslim, i should have made that clearer, but the line about not being able to fight nazis with nazism is very profound. cheers.

[Zelhar]

welcome to the forum. And i say that there is no such thing as good Muslim, that's like a good Nazi, an impossibility. Anyone who is a follower of Muhamad is evil.

[DALMACIJA]

You are correct on this, i have known some catholics and muslims who are good, but i use the word muslim in this storie to refer to a particular gang at the school who where only muslim, i should have made that clearer, but the line about not being able to fight nazis with nazism is very profound. cheers.

Correct my brother!

Look we Serbs and Jews are diveded by religion. We do not share the same religion.
But that does not mean that we can not be brothers. As long as we respect each other and stay good people, there won not be a problem.

finaly, we are all the descants of the falen man Adam. So, we who are born after Adam are all brothers by Adam.

[DALMACIJA]

welcome to the forum. And i say that there is no such thing as good Muslim, that's like a good Nazi, an impossibility. Anyone who is a follower of Muhamad is evil.

I am now copping your way of thinking.

What about the people who follow the pope?
To me anyone who is a follower of the pope is evil...

Is this the right way of thinking?

[Kushiel]

DALMACIJA, rather than say we are divided by religeon, i would say we are united by religeon, both our religeons worship the same god, and both religeons have contributed to the world.

Zelhar, although i know what you mean about muslims, i cannot tell a lie, and i have met two muslims who were only muslim due to their family influence who had genuine good hearts. they did not join their "brothers" in ape like violence but prefered to work and study, and were good friends of mine. They were very unique in this way of thinking though, and payed for it during high school.

[Zelhar]

welcome to the forum. And i say that there is no such thing as good Muslim, that's like a good Nazi, an impossibility. Anyone who is a follower of Muhamad is evil.

I am now copping your way of thinking.

What about the people who follow the pope?
To me anyone who is a follower of the pope is evil...

Is this the right way of thinking?

I think not, there is a difference. Islam is an evil ideology abusing the concept of Allah to control people and cause them to murder and pillage and take over the world. The founder of Islam is Muhammad, you should read what the Quran and the Hadith- their supposedly divine and most holy books say.
The founder of Christianity is Jesus, so Chrisitians should first follow his teaching. You are a christian yourself so you should know that. If your patriarch or priest were ordering you to murder the infidels I suppose you would not listen to him right? But in Islam if a man does not follow the evil path as taught by the founder of Islam than he is not a real muslim and he is considered a hypocrite and a rebel against Allah.  

I am a Jew so I don't follow Jesus or Buddha or whoever, yet I make a distinction between them to Muhammad. Because the founder of most religions that i know, such as Buddha, Confucius, Jesus and Zoroaster, were not evil, they did not made a religious command to slaughter the infidels and use terror. I think they really wanted to better humanity, while Muhammad wanted to control it and kill all opposition.

To Catholics the pope is their revered religious leader, yet as far as I know, they don't think he has political authority, only moral and religious. The only theocratic Catholic state in the world is the Vatican, while every Muslim country is partly theocracy (For example there is death sentence for insulting Islam in most muslim countries and also Muslim are forbidden by law to renounce Islam and switch religion in most Islamic countries.)

I think there were evil popes in the past and the entire church used to be evil (for example during the inquisition). But I think that this is a case of evil people only, I don't think they were good Christians although they acted in the name of it.

[Zelhar]

Zelhar, although i know what you mean about muslims, i cannot tell a lie, and i have met two muslims who were only muslim due to their family influence who had genuine good hearts. they did not join their "brothers" in ape like violence but prefered to work and study, and were good friends of mine. They were very unique in this way of thinking though, and payed for it during high school.

I know that there are people who are nominally Muslim due to their background but they try to be good persons. According to Islam they are not good Muslims if they defy the teaching of the insane 'prophet'. I think that because Islam is such a danger to the world, they shouldn't remain on the fence, they must renounce Islam or at list say that they do not believe the teaching of Muhammad represents the word of God.

And moreover  one should check what they think about the Muslim countries, and Muslim terror. For example there are secular Iranians living in the west and adapted to western living, yet they still support Iran and they think it has the right to develop nuclear bombs.

[Kushiel]

Zelhar, although i know what you mean about muslims, i cannot tell a lie, and i have met two muslims who were only muslim due to their family influence who had genuine good hearts. they did not join their "brothers" in ape like violence but prefered to work and study, and were good friends of mine. They were very unique in this way of thinking though, and payed for it during high school.

I know that there are people who are nominally Muslim due to their background but they try to be good persons. According to Islam they are not good Muslims if they defy the teaching of the insane 'prophet'. I think that because Islam is such a danger to the world, they shouldn't remain on the fence, they must renounce Islam or at list say that they do not believe the teaching of Muhammad represents the word of G-d.

And moreover  one should check what they think about the Muslim countries, and Muslim terror. For example there are secular Iranians living in the west and adapted to western living, yet they still support Iran and they think it has the right to develop nuclear bombs.

Yes, then these guys indeed fit the checklist, they have both renounced Muhammed when confronted by other muslims.

[DALMACIJA]

I think not, there is a difference. Islam is an evil ideology abusing the concept of Allah to control people and cause them to murder and pillage and take over the world. The founder of Islam is Muhammad, you should read what the Quran and the Hadith- their supposedly divine and most holy books say.

Historically the Western church has murdered more Jews than the followers of Mohamed. The program of the Vatican was to destroy the Eastern Church and the Jews in order to control/ catholize Europe. The Vatican prosecuted the Jews 2000 years long and since the Church separation, which took place in 1054, it started also to prosecute the Orthodox nations. The Vatican had killed more Jews than the followers of Mohhamed.
So, the followers of the Pope have more blood on their hands than the Muslims.

The founder of Christianity is Jesus, so Chrisitians should first follow his teaching. You are a christian yourself so you should know that.

You say that I must know? I do not know who they are following?
They do not share the same religion as I.

Jesus says in the Bible not everybody who uses my Name is indeed one of my true followers. The founders of the Church of Jesus Christus were the Apostles.
Jesus brought the word to the earth. He ordered His apostles to spread the word all over the world. Jesus did not gave authorization to bring changes into the word!
In the year of 1054, the Western(Rome) and the Eastern Churches (Tzarigrad) separated their selves from each others. The Roman Chruch started to compromise and to change the origin Christian teachings/ traditions. That resulted in the well know Church separation from 1054.

If you search Christianity than you must go to it's roots from the days of foundation, when the Apostles were living. We believe that the Orthodox Church did not have changed much from the beginning.

[Zelhar]

Like I said the church and its followers did very evil things in the name of their religion but I don't think that their religion really teaches them to be evil, since it is based on the bible and the NT. 
So I have respect to someone who calls himself Catholic, unless he chose to be evil. I don't think that someone becomes evil just because he believes in  Catholicism do you Dlamacija?

I know Catholicism and Orthodoxy stem from the same religion, but now they have their differences, and its not my place to judge which, if any, is right (neither one as far as I am concerned since I'm a Jew). So I think everyman live should live according to his faith, and let other live according to theirs.

[DALMACIJA]

Like I said the church and its followers did very evil things in the name of their religion but I don't think that their religion really teaches them to be evil, since it is based on the bible and the NT. 
So I have respect to someone who calls himself Catholic, unless he chose to be evil. I don't think that someone becomes evil just because he believes in  Catholicism do you Dlamacija?

I do not think that also.
I also do not think that someone who believes in Islam will automatically become evil.

[DALMACIJA]

Like I said the church and its followers did very evil things in the name of their religion

Orthodoxism and the Serbs for example.

- Look there were also bad Orthodox priests and others who were baptized in the Orthodox Church. Look people have a free will so, as long as they live they can become evil.
- For example you had also Serbian war criminals during the war in Yugoslavia.
That were people who had committed war crime in the name of the Serbian nation.
But these people did not have a huge support from the Serbs. They did not represent anybody.
. They can be considered as individuals/ exceptions.

Germany and Croatia, they had Nazi governments. So, their government was evil.
90% of their people supported those regimes. A government prepresents a nation ans is moslty supported by a nation.
Now we are not dealing with individual criminals or with crimes coming from groups who are out of any control. 

The same counts for the Vatican. Many popes and other high representatives of the Western Church supported crimes like Anti-Semitism. Orthodox Chruch leaders did not had that kind of atittude. So, you can not say that the leaders of the Eastern Orthodox Church were connected with Nazism, Communism or Anti-Semititsm.
But I do not consider all Catholics equal to their leaders. Normal Catholic follows the NT and the OT. For example Catholics in America are not the Vatican. Just like the Serbs who live in America are not the Republic of Serbia.

It is a fact that the political and religious leaders of the West were connected to evil regimes and programs.

Why do you think that the Western propaganda fabricated many lies against the Serbs?
They do not wish to be the only Nazis on the Earth. According to them Serbs had also fascist governments whicxh planned and organized ethnic of cleansing and genocide.
So, there is no difference between the West en the East since they all were Nazis, according to Western media lies.

Serbian authorities in former Yugoslavia had not organized or conducted war crime, in contradiction to the Nazis from WW2. The crimes were only committed by individuals and that is not on the responsibility of the Serbian authorities of Knin, Pale and Belgrade. That's why the Hauge tribunal is established to sentence the so called
Serbian perpetrators of genocide. This is all part of I think some kind of Anti-Serbian plan.

[Zelhar]

And someone who believes in Satanism, is he also  not automatically evil ?

[Zelhar]

I agree that the western governments are anti-Serb. They are not just pro-muslim, they are actually anti Serb. I think they blame Serbia for instigating WWI, and some Germans probably also hate them for resisting the Nazi occupation, because the Serb partisans were very effective warriors. I don't think that the reason for them being anti-Serb is directly resulted from western christianity animosity to easter Christianity. If it were so I suppose they would also be against- Greece, Romania, Georgia, Bulgaria, Montenegro...

[DALMACIJA]

I agree that the western governments are anti-Serb. They are not just pro-muslim, they are actually anti Serb. I think they blame Serbia for instigating WWI, and some Germans probably also hate them for resisting the Nazi occupation,

That are also some reasons.
The blame us for the fall of the Austrian-Hungarian empire which took place after WWI. You are right on that.

II don't think that the reason for them being anti-Serb is directly resulted from western christianity animosity to easter Christianity. If it were so I suppose they would also be against- Greece, Romania, Georgia, Bulgaria, Montenegro...

The West supported the Turkish colonial empire, the Ottomans, and saw in them a tool to destroy the Eastern Byzantic empire. In order to destroy Orthodoxism Vatican support the Turkish expansion towards the Byzantic empire and the colonization of the Ottomans against Serbia. So, they supported also the destruction of Greece and other Byzantic countries.   

Now you are talking about the Greece of today!
Greece is celebrating Christmus for example on 25/26 that is according to the Western Calendar. Greece compromised much with Rome through history.
Greece of today is loyal to the West and Brussel.

Bulgaria was a nation which supported Hitler and had always hostile intentions against the Serbs. We the Serbs call them backstabbers, they stabbed us always in our back.
For example when the Ottomanic empire collapsed they, the Bulgarians, turned their back against us and attacked us in order to gain control over Macedonia. During WW2 they did the shame thing.

Montenegro is one of Vatican's victims. The land of Montenegro was always considered as Serbian land. The kings of Montenegro considered them selves always as Serbs. The Montenegro of today is anti-Serbian.
During communist Yugoslavia the communists created of Serbs other separated nations, which never exited before in history. You had never a Montenegrian, Bosnian or Macedonian nation at the Balkans. Those groups belonged always to the Serbian nation. Tito (mason) created new nations out of the Serbs during Yugoslavia.
For example in the first time in History the Orthodox Church of Montenegro was established and the nation of Montenegro .  The Orthodox Church of Montenegro never exited in Montenegro, the only official Church of Montenegro was the Serbian Orthodox Church.
Also there was never a Montenegrian language, the official language of Montenegro
was always Serbian.   With lies and false history the communists teached the Montenegro Serbs that they are not Serbs but an other separated nation.

Today you have Macedonian, Montenegrians and Bosnians at the Balkans.
These are invented and false nations and belong actually to the Serbs.
In the state Montenegro 45% declares it self Serbian, the others are or brainwashed new Montenegrian or other minorities like Albanians, Bosnians and Croats.
In Montenegro, once a great Serbian country, the Serbs (the autochthonic people) are declared as a national minority. That’s a consequences of the Anti-Serbian communist regime which took place 45 years long in Yugoslavia.

[DALMACIJA]

, because the Serb partisans were very effective warriors.

Partisans were fighting for power/  control.
Their main intention was not the fight against the occupation forces, but the fight against their rivals in power, the Serbian Cetniks.

We can start a new thread in regard to the communist if it’s necessary, because it is a long story.

[Zelhar]

, because the Serb partisans were very effective warriors.

Partisans were fighting for power/  control.
Their main intention was not the fight against the occupation forces, but the fight against their rivals in power, the Serbian Cetniks.

We can start a new thread in regard to the communist if it’s necessary, because it is a long story.

I meant both the Cetniks and the Communists. Unfortunately the fought each other as well. I think Churchill is quoted saying that the Communists better fought the Nazis than the Cetniks, and this is why he supplied them with arms.

[DALMACIJA]

I think Churchill is quoted saying that the Communists better fought the Nazis than the Cetniks, and this is why he supplied them with arms.

Heheh... Do you think thats true ? ?

[DALMACIJA]

 I think Churchill is quoted saying that the Communists better fought the Nazis than the Cetniks, and this is why he supplied them with arms.

Believe me, Churchil lied when the said that the Communists fought better the Nazis than the Cetniks!

The real reason why he supported the communists is something totally else.

[Zelhar]

I honestly don't know enough about that subject.

[Boyana]

Good point Zelhar!

[Serbian Cetnik (šumadinac)]

the reason why the brits and later the americans supported tito was because communist spies in english intelligence changed the kill count, in the beginning they supported the cetniks because they were more effective, then the spies changed it and they shifted their support.

[Saint Sava]

The first true-fact to know is that Partisans in yugoslavia exclusively fought for power durgin the war, which tells much about their loyalty to any nation they belonged to.

That's why their ennemy number one were the Chetniks of Draza Mihailovic who rejected capitulation against german invaders and their allies in and out of yugoslavia. German invaders and their allies came at best second in the priority list camp to fight against.

In Serbia, and in extension, among Serbs, Partisans were brought from outside as there used to be very few support to communism among Serbs. They were brought at the express demand of Stalin and Ante Pavelic separately, during the then still-alive Ribbentropp-Molotov agreement between Nazi Germany and USSR establishing mutual peace and non agression.

Partisans were mostly ordered freedom by Hitler from prisons in France (where they've been jailed after the disastrous spanish civil war in 1936, where international brigades fled Spain by the mountain Pyrénées, hoping to be saved by, at that time the sole leftist socialist-communist government in Europe), to be sent in Serbia, where they could give a help to Germans for stopping the serbians fight for freedom.

Due to these profile and assigned goal, partisans without hesitation fought shoulder to shoulder with oustachis west of the Drina, as commanders of partisans units were all croats, all the soldiers were most exclusively Serbs, some Partisans "officers" having their own brother beeing commanders of Oustashis. Betraying Chetniks east of the Drina in their attacks of German occupiers since 1941, then provoking mass execution of Serbs by doing non-sense and unuseful attacks of second line occupiers administration while was used to be put in practice the rule: "1 german wounded = 50 executed Serbian civilian. 1 dead german = 100 executed Serbian civilian". Not to mention of course that those "heroic" partisans actions where exclusively taken in Serbia among Serbian population, and NEVER on croatian, bosnian muslim, albanian, hungarian territories of yugoslavia.

Partisans also signed an agreement with German forces that they would fight shoulder to shoulder with German nazis, against Allied (UK, USA, etc...) forces if any Allied invasion had to happen in Dalmatia, the then yugoslav Adriatic coast (which was in practice mostly handled by Draza Mihailovic Chetniks).

The reason why, first, an uprise happened in Serbia, while elsewhere in Europe it was very quiet is that Churchill, frightened to death for beeing invaded by Hitler during the Battle for England, tried to make reduce the Hitler's pressure on the Britanny island by forcing an uprise in Europe very far from England. Then Serbs were glorified by the medias and also allied politicians, because their one and only military commander General Draza Mihailovic made a sort of island of freedom in all nazi-occupied Europe. Then, in 1943, they diden't need Serbs any more, asking Chetniks to commit suicide for still beeing glorified. As Chetniks were reasonable people, they refused, then Churchill had his alibi to transfer support to communist partisans for who: the most Serbs were killed - the most they felt happy.

From 1943 on, Churchill was thinking of extending the UK influence in the Balkans, that's why he supported those who had the best probability to blindly obey him. The main reason was preventing Russia (USSR) to reach warm seas (Adriatic, though Mediterranean see) which is vital for developping trade and exports to the World (according to all Geopolitical rules in the last 150 years).

Even with Western Support, communist partisans coulden't take power in yugoslavia, until Soviet soldiers crossed Serbian borders in october 1944, gave freedom, shoulder to shoulder with Draza Mihailovic's Chetniks, to Serbian towns, then turned their arms toward Chetniks, arresting them and released power to communist partisans.

Churchill in 1945 tried to hide that he was betrayed by yugo-partisans, when he fled to an island on the Adriatic coast to meet tito for a few days, he met him the first day, and in the morning of the second, Churchill had to face the evidence: tito fled from their meeting in the early morning to meet soviet officials in Belgrade without informing Churchill about that. Hopefully for the West, as tito was all but legitimate, his dicatorship couldn't function without the Marshall plan that enslaved and destroyed the Serbian economy until nowadays.

Sorry, I coulden't cut the story shorter...