Over the years, I've read most of the ancient historians who have been translated into English. Including many of the various translations and editions of the ancient historians. If pushed, I can translate, a questionable sentence in Greek or Latin into English for my own understanding.

There is nothing that I have ever read that indicates that Alexander the Great was a homosexual or bi-sexual.

There were Roman emperors, who were written about, by the ancient historians as homosexuals & bi-sexuals. But, nothing about Alexander.

Oliver Stone a/k/a Silverstein(?) has a movie about Alexander being released today. From what reviewers are saying the central theme of the movie is the bi-sexuality-homosexuality of Alexander. Are we looking at jew projection of a Greek hero?

homosex was a widely practiced perversion among the ancients of many nations including the Greeks and Romans. predictably it was worse in places where women were not available. Plato and other philosophers denounced homosexual conduct.

however, many ancient Greek words apparently lend themselves to plastic interpretations. Thus the institution of mentoring youths is sometimes twisted by modern day perverts to suggest approval of pederasty. For example. And very close friend/comrade relationships such as Achilles and Patroclus are presented in a perverse or unchaste manner.

at the same time, it's clear that the ancient Greeks were more promiscuous in their sexual ideals that we. all that being said, it is a matter of little significance amplified by a bunch of catamites and subversive jews.

There's 400 years, or more between the life of Alexander, and the alleged perversions attributed to imperial Rome and the Roman emperors by the ancient historians.

There just isn't an ancient source, that claims Alexander to be a homosexual or a bi-sexual.

That Alexander bought into, to some extent, his mother's studied insanity that he was a god. That is supported by most of the ancient historians.

Funny, how the jews don't exist in Alexander's day in Palestine. Or if they did they were overlooked as just another temple cult by the ancient historians. Could this be part of Stone-Silversteins' attitude too?

Oliver Stone a/k/a Silverstein(?) has a movie about Alexander being released today. From what reviewers are saying the central theme of the movie is the bi-sexuality-homosexuality of Alexander. Are we looking at jew projection of a Greek hero?

It's typical Hollywood pap: sensationalize so the vast crowd of morons can "get it."

If you want something interesting, try pre-1950 literature.

If you want a good handle on the character of Alexander, I would reccomend The Campaigns of Alexander, by Arrian.

Arrian was a Roman of Greek birth, his real name was Lucius Flavius Arrianus.

Arrian besides being a serious scholar and author, was also a capable administrator and successful Roman military leader.

Here is an excellent website dealing with the true character of Alexander as portrayed by the ancient historical sources:
http://www.livius.org/aj-al/alexander/alexander_z1b.html

When I first learned of Alexander (in public school, some 30 years ago) there was no mention of him being a faggot-NONE. Nowadays, ANY writings of Alexander contains at least one aside that he was queer.

Problem is: The writers never list source material for their allegation. Apparently it is now so accepted as "common knowledge" that Alexander the Great played the skin flute, that references are no longer required.

Total, unprovable BS!

never list source material for their allegation. Apparently it is now so accepted as "common knowledge" [...], that references are no longer required.

Total, unprovable BS!

Nefarious lies! They would not dare employ such dastardly tactics! Why, it's practically unheard of, it is!

When I first learned of Alexander (in public school, some 30 years ago) there was no mention of him being a faggot-NONE. Nowadays, ANY writings of Alexander contains at least one aside that he was queer.

Problem is: The writers never list source material for their allegation. Apparently it is now so accepted as "common knowledge" that Alexander the Great played the skin flute, that references are no longer required.

Total, unprovable BS!



Obviously. I have seen a tend now, for years, to portray the greatest heroes of the White Race as having at least one failing that would make them unworthy of admiration by modern Whites. Alexander wasn't a fag until it served the purpose of the jew to make him one. The jew just can not allow modern Whites to have even one example to show our children of what a White Man is supposed to be. Hence Hitler, Alexander, Wagner, whomever automatically become a fag, drug addict, ect..

Jews find homosexuality quite acceptable, for they themselves perform it, as well as incest, and other degeneracy they can’t resist. And really, if the white race performed degeneracy to a high degree as Jews, Civilization would not exist.

As the old Jew saying goes: for every finger pointed at you, three pointed right back at them.

I don't think Oliver Stone is jewish. He doesn't appear to be and doesn't behave like one. The names Stein (German for stone) is questionable. I'm pretty sure Stone is a gentile.

I wasn't aware that the movie even addressed the sexual proclivities of Alexander. I doubt it's that big of a deal in the film. It's a war movie about conquest, fighting, passion, and big battle scenes. Stone wouldn't stoop to sensationalizing Alexander's lust for male flesh. No way.

I don't think Oliver Stone is jewish. He doesn't appear to be and doesn't behave like one. The names Stein (German for stone) is questionable. I'm pretty sure Stone is a gentile.

I wasn't aware that the movie even addressed the sexual proclivities of Alexander. I doubt it's that big of a deal in the film. It's a war movie about conquest, fighting, passion, and big battle scenes. Stone wouldn't stoop to sensationalizing Alexander's lust for male flesh. No way.Movies are political mind altering as well. Fact of the matter Alexander the great is history, does not constitute the malign message the producer has in mind. For there are countless historical facts, and books of Alexander the great , but the masses of assess are too lazy to research themselves, and as usual, they will swallow this like a good goy.

Could very well just be an attempt at honest historical depiction sans undertones of reeducation - but seriously: Jared Leto as Hephaistion? I mean, come on...

Alexander by Stephen Pressfield is a good book, like his others.

I don't think Oliver Stone is jewish. He doesn't appear to be and doesn't behave like one. The names Stein (German for stone) is questionable. I'm pretty sure Stone is a gentile.


Oliver Stone is half-jewish.

Over the years, I've read most of the ancient historians who have been translated into English. Including many of the various translations and editions of the ancient historians. If pushed, I can translate, a questionable sentence in Greek or Latin into English for my own understanding.

There is nothing that I have ever read that indicates that Alexander the Great was a homosexual or bi-sexual.

There were Roman emperors, who were written about, by the ancient historians as homosexuals & bi-sexuals. But, nothing about Alexander.

Oliver Stone a/k/a Silverstein(?) has a movie about Alexander being released today. From what reviewers are saying the central theme of the movie is the bi-sexuality-homosexuality of Alexander. Are we looking at jew projection of a Greek hero?


We need to face two facts:-
Homosexuality was common amongst Greek men at that time and was fostered by the very masculine martial society that was predominant amongst the Greek city states and Macedonia.
Alexander had an extremely close relationship with Hephaestion which went beyond the norms of male-male friendship.
In reality probably we will never know as the evidence is not conclusive either way.

We need to face two facts:-
Homosexuality was common amongst Greek men at that time and was fostered by the very masculine martial society that was predominant amongst the Greek city states and Macedonia.
Alexander had an extremely close relationship with Hephaestion which went beyond the norms of male-male friendship.
In reality probably we will never know as the evidence is not conclusive either way.

There is absolutely nothing in any of the ancient histories that would suggest that Alexander or his men were homosexuals. Or that homosexuality was common at that time among the Greeks.

That Alexander and Hephaestion were "friends" is how the ancient's put it. Friends not lovers or some such hard or soft expression of homosexuality.

Alexander trusted Hephaestion with independent command and with the better parts of his army. Also, at least one of the ancient historians claims that Hepaestion had saved Alexander's life, or warned Alexander thus saving Alexander's life when they were young boys.

Homosexuality, is an eastern almost Semite/Asian thing that really doesn't become common until four hundred or so years later in the west during the decline of the Roman Empire.

That the Greeks first encountered rampant homosexuality in the near east during the campaigns of Alexander is most likely.

This is just a guess but modern perceptions about Alexander were shaped strongly around 30 years ago by the South African writer Mary Renault's bestselling fictions about him.

Her two biographical novels were The Fire From Heaven and The Persian Boy. In both books she insists she sticks to historical fact, and in both books the homosex factor is pretty steep. While I have always enjoyed historical recreations I actually gave uo on The Persian Boy about halfway through. Way too much about the starstruck boy and his lust for Alexander in that one.

Renault added an afterward in The Persian Boy in which she disputes what everyone else more or less agrees on, that Alexander the Great was an alcoholic. Her objection is that an alcoholic has a low working capacity and would never been able to carry out the conquests had he been as drunk as often as the contemporary witnesses allege. She forgets that Alexander died in his early thirties and a person with a reasonably strong constitution can stay drunk most of the time at that age without serious incapacity.

Alexander just died before it caught up to him.

I concur. My dear ol' pa, for instance, may a miserable lush, but he is also one of the hardest workers I know (and 60, at that).

I wasn't aware that the movie even addressed the sexual proclivities of Alexander. I doubt it's that big of a deal in the film. It's a war movie about conquest, fighting, passion, and big battle scenes. Stone wouldn't stoop to sensationalizing Alexander's lust for male flesh. No way.

Seen it yet?

Seen it yet?

No, and I won't. I can't standeth that Colin Farrell guy. Angelina Jolie as his mother? Yeah, right.

The effort at suspending my disbelief will be too much to bear.

Do you think it was wicked of me to feel a certain thrill when she, during an especially emotional scene, spat daintily in his face?

We need to face two facts:-
Homosexuality was common amongst Greek men at that time and was fostered by the very masculine martial society that was predominant amongst the Greek city states and Macedonia.
Alexander had an extremely close relationship with Hephaestion which went beyond the norms of male-male friendship.
In reality probably we will never know as the evidence is not conclusive either way.
You just contradicted yourself in this post.

If the "evidence is not conclusive" as you put it, then why are you touting the rumor that Alexander was a queer as a FACT?

I think that like animals, all human cultures and nations have "known of" homosexuality in the sense that men when deprived of female sex will often resort to sodomy.

however, what Stein has done in this film is something diffierent: he has taken the love of one comrade for another -- called "agape" in Greek-- and made it into EROS which is a different sanctifying love between man and wife.

"Eros" between men, is perverse and profane. It CANT be be eros in the sense that homo men, cant be marriage. Marriage and eros are only between man and woman, by nature and by definition.

Now for men in jail or the like to be good friends and have some incidental homosexual conduct is not unknown today nor I doubt in any other era. I think probably the pre-Christian ancients were more tolerant of this than we. There is some evidence for that in the pagan world of Greco-Romans such as, the rape of Ganymede by Zeus. But nothing specific to Alexander, which is what is in discussion here.

Moreover, the Greek philosophers of virtue such as Aristotle never suggested that was good or equivalent to eros between man and wife, or an "alternative lifestyle" like the catamites of today advocate. That is degenerate profanity and Stein's advancement of that agenda is sickening filth.

There's a book by Adonis Georgiades called "Debunking The Myth of Homosexuality in Ancient Greece" that is supposed to refute that long popular myth. Unfortunately the book has not been translated from its native Greek yet.

Read the review here: http://www.grecoreport.com/debunking_the_myth_of_homosexuality_in_ancient_greece.htm

Did you know that out of the 80,000 ancient vases found in Athens only 30 have been found that actually depict homosexual acts? That's hardly a majority of faggots!

that grecoreport is a damn good website! I shall have to drop that fellow a note.

however, many ancient Greek words apparently lend themselves to plastic interpretations. Thus the institution of mentoring youths is sometimes twisted by modern day perverts to suggest approval of pederasty. For example. And very close friend/comrade relationships such as Achilles and Patroclus are presented in a perverse or unchaste manner.From what I've heard, the ancient Greeks had three different words for love, while in English we only have the one general word.

Agape (Ah-gah-pay) was sacrificial love. Philos was brotherly love. Eros was the sexual (erotic) type of love most often between opposite sexes.

It is easy to see how philia between, say, two warriors can be translated today by sicko jew/homo "historians" to mean that they were having sex with each other.

From what I've heard, the ancient Greeks had three different words for love, while in English we only have the one general word.

Agape (Ah-gah-pay) was sacrificial love. Philos was brotherly love. Eros was the sexual (erotic) type of love most often between opposite sexes.

It is easy to see how philia between, say, two warriors can be translated today by sicko jew/homo "historians" to mean that they were having sex with each other.

Homosexuality was rife in ancient Greece.But then again southern Europeans are known for their over emotional natures so perhaps that is where the confusion came in? :D

Homosexuality was rife in ancient Greece.But then again southern Europeans are known for their over emotional natures so perhaps that is where the confusion came in? :DYou should have a look at this website- http://www.grecoreport.com/debunking_the_myth_of_homosexuality_in_ancient_greece.htm

A pitiful creature like Barney Frank, for instance, would have -- upon his particular "proclivity" being discovered -- been executed or sent into exile. After which, his living quarters would have been fumigated and ritually purified by a priest. Unless, of course, he had previously "gone public" with his homosexual lifestyle. In that case, though he would have been permitted to live, he would, under Athenian law (grafí etairísios),

not be permitted to become one of the nine archons, nor to discharge the office of priest, nor to act as an advocate for the state, nor shall he hold any office whatsoever, at home or abroad, whether filled by lot or by election; he shall not be sent as a herald; he shall not take part in debate, nor be present at the public sacrifices; when the citizens are wearing garlands, he shall wear none; and he shall not enter within the limits of the place that has been purified for the assembling of the people. Any man who has been convicted of defying these prohibitions pertaining to sexual conduct shall be put to death (Aeschines. "Contra Timarchus," as cited in Georgiades, p. 69).

We learn as well that "Athens had the strictest laws pertaining to homosexuality of any democracy that has ever existed" (62). In non-democratic Sparta, as well as in democratic Crete and the rest of democratic Hellas, there were similar prohibitions with similar punishments as that meted out in Athens, and Georgiades gives us citations galore to prove his main thesis: "At no time, and in no place, was this practice considered normal behavior, or those engaged in it allowed to go unpunished" (passim). In order to remove any doubt whatsoever, he draws on such ancient luminaries as Aeschylus, Aristophanes, Diodorus Seculus, Euripides, Homer, Lysias, Plato, Plutarch and Xenophon, all of whom have left a written record as to what the prevailing norms were concerning this behavior...

From what I've heard, the ancient Greeks had three different words for love, while in English we only have the one general word.

Agape (Ah-gah-pay) was sacrificial love. Philos was brotherly love. Eros was the sexual (erotic) type of love most often between opposite sexes.

It is easy to see how philia between, say, two warriors can be translated today by sicko jew/homo "historians" to mean that they were having sex with each other.

Excellent insight. Those are indeed relevant distinctions obscured by the use of the ambiguous English word love. I love you Hephaestion. Of course; I too love my friends and comrades-- but not in the erotic sense of the word.

Yes the pre-Christian Greeks had a more tolerant view towards homosexual conduct, that is known. But that fact alone proves nothing about the specifics of Alexander.

Moreover, I think that even "homosexuality" in the modern sense as a lifestyle opposed to "breeding" and other healthy norms of social life and dedicated instead to sterile self-gratification, would have been condemned by the ancients as inferior and damaging to society. So even if they were more tolerant to incidental homosexual conduct, they were probably less inclined to tolerant persistently deviant individuals bent on wrecking society.

I think that is why closet homosexuality is seen as rightly a lesser threat than "queer" this and that. The one thing remains an isolated vice, the other attacks the heterosexual foundation of the continued existence of our race.

WTF? Common sense tells us that fags don't rule empires. Have any of you ever even met a queer? A big part of being queer is being a dick-sucking sissy. They're not exactly the sword-swinging army-commanding types. Anyone who can read a history book and still apply a feminine personality to someone like Alexander, has a pretty wild imagination.

WTF? Common sense tells us that fags don't rule empires. Have any of you ever even met a queer? A big part of being queer is being a dick-sucking sissy. They're not exactly the sword-swinging army-commanding types. Anyone who can read a history book and still apply a feminine personality to someone like Alexander, has a pretty wild imagination.

Umm I dont know if that is civil or not but it didnt sound like it.

For what it's worth, they say one of the Emperor Fredericks was homosexual. I dont know if that was Barbarossa or the Enlightenment era guy. Anybody heard this one before?

He wasnt gay. He had at least three wives and many concubines. And his wife Roxanne was Aryan.

here oliver stone complains

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/afplifestylebritain

here oliver stone complains

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/afplifestylebritain
Wrong link. That one is about some n****r-jew stage play that's going to be aired on BBC despite everyone's complaints.

Wrong link. That one is about some n****r-jew stage play that's going to be aired on BBC despite everyone's complaints.

huh. what happened. sorry. ps dont say "n****r in the civil forum.

here are couple other links:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3148901a1870,00.html

http://jam.canoe.ca/Movies/2005/01/05/809245-ap.html

There's only one insistance that Alexander was gay that I know of.

And it was from Quintus Curtius Rufus (Roman Consul) in his History of Alexander written between the years 31-41 BC. In his book Curtius mentions "the persian boy" whom he claims Alexander slept with. But his history has been proven to be full of errors, and possibly written as a metaphor to the tyranical reign of Tiberius rather than that of Alexander. Another mistake that Curtius made was in his using of Cleitarchus's History of Alexander as his main contemporary source. Cleitarchus was a fabricator who used the rumors of soldiers as fact. It was Cleitarchus who made Alexander look like a psychopath and alcoholic.

I think there's one other source, but I cant remember it. These fraudulent sources--who have been proved wrong time and again--are still being hyped and passed on as actual fact by modern liberal historians. And like every jew in hollywood oliver stone chose to use these liberal incantations instead of actually doing the research for himself!

On a similar subject; the upcoming movie about Hannibal. The info I found on rottentomatoes.com is that there are two in production. No one knows which one will make it to the theaters, if both, or if neither will.
One starring Vin Diesel, whose private film company is called 'one race productions,' or something like that.
The other has the tentative title of 'The African,' and is set to star none other than Denzel Washington.

Once again, history and hollywood are like two opposing trains on the same track. We know that the Carthaginians were descendants of the Phoenicians, who were categorized as a white race by their contemporaries. We'll have to wait and see on this one, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Romans are depicted as spindly and old looking men, while the Carthaginians will be played by mulattos. Undoubtedly, they will portray the Sacred Band as the perfect military, since they were homosexual and all(and as we all know from the TV, a homosexual character cannot be portrayed as an obnoxious disease spreader, even though that is the reality.)

Thank you very much for that link. I am currently engaged in mortal combat with the book vendor's online webstore to complete a site membership so that I can buy this thing. It's only 200 pages, so I'll make it a little pet project and translate it once I receive it or, if the diction is way above my head, I'll at least try to translate key points as faithfully as I can.

Of course, if the Greeks themselves can be reduced to nothing more than "a bunch of fairies," then the inferiors triumph in their minds not only over Greeks but White civilization itself. I'm glad Mr. Georgiades wrote this book.

I've also just emailed my few Greek friends to warn them of this Hollywood propaganda, this "Alexander" film.

EDIT: I'm having no luck with this site. The sign-up button to complete the membership does nothing when I click on it.