FBI Teaches Agents: 'Mainstream' Muslims Are 'Violent, Radical'

Well, it sounds to me like they are teaching their agents correctly.

Any individual who is very religious in ANY of the three Abrahamic cults can VERY easily become a dangerous individual.

Anyone who is devoted to any of those three religions while believing in it all literally (as the most devoted do) may easily become DANGEROUS individuals with nothing to lose and everything to gain for their violent and destructive behavior.

Believing in fairy tales, and fairy tale characters who promise that THEIR people and cult are 'good' ,and that the nonbelievers are 'evil' (among many other DANGEROUS beliefs) makes for folks who can be harmful to others around them in society...

Originally posted by pthena
Again, certainly, after talking about these conditions and prerequisites, if that situation outlined is present, according to the Quran, fighting would be a "duty" of the muslim.

The Quran certainly does not command its followers to "conquer the world" in the name of sharia, in fact, it says the exact opposite: that if God had wanted the entire world to be muslim, he would have made it so, and what is man's place that he thinks he should countermand God?

Then why does their Prophet himself say otherwise? Muhammed states that he considers it a divine directive to coerce the entire world to "confess that there is no God but Allah, and I am his Messenger."

I've read the whole Qur'an at least once, with the intent of discovering what Jihad actually was. I don't feel compelled to look at isolated verses, taken out of context. I agree completely with babloyi's statements which I quoted above.

That's fine. Some might say that the whole of Islamic theology can be summed up with the Dalek catchphrase, "EXTERMINATE!," while others can claim that it's pure kittens, bunny rabbits, and rainbows. The real issue here is how Muslims themselves actually behave, regardless of what the Qu'ran says. Here's an example of the answer to that question.



The question is whether or not Muslims who indiscriminately rape and/or murder people, and otherwise behave in sociologically aberrant or detrimental ways, are behaving in a manner that is consistent with Islamic theology. If the Qu'ran does not advocate violence, then there is more of a chance that these elements can be brought under control, because they themselves would be guilty of infidelity. If, however, these things are considered normative, theologically endorsed behaviours, then we have a much more serious problem.

It can be established that Christian violence is not consistent with the example of Jesus Christ. In the case of Muhammed, however, that is not at all clear.

The problem comes in when there is apparent Qu'ranic support for things which are empirically, demonstrably socially harmful, such as female circumcision, a practice of comparitively poor hygiene, or indiscriminate violence or rape. Although Western society does have some enormously harmful, degenerate, and undesirable elements as well, the difference in our case is at least a theoretical chance for these elements to be critically reviewed and changed. Within Islam, it apparently does not matter how harmful a given form of behaviour is; if the Qu'ran advocates it, then it stays. The only reason why I am even able to write these words, is because Islam has not yet entirely taken over the planet. If it had, I would be apparently be put to death.

I say this as an eight year veteran of the US military who has engaged in acts of war in a classified mission by direct orders of a US President.

We can acknowledge that there are positive or beneficial sociological elements of the Islamic model, as much as we like. I've already done that. That, however, is not the central issue here.

The central issue here, is whether or not the Islamic model is, on balance, a threat to the survival of human society overall. I submit that it is; and one of the main reasons for such, is again my acknowledgement that if we were already living under the Islamic ideal, I would face death for typing these very words.

To demonstrate the perversity of American norm, I will make 2 statements.

It can be said without qualification, that America is the single most degenerate, relentlessly destructive human culture that has ever existed, bar none. You can love your country as much as you like, but if you are going to be remotely objective, that cannot be honestly denied.

This is another part of the problem. Shar'ia becomes attractive because individuals begin to perceive that under it, the chances of long term human survival are far greater than under the American model. The problem is, that this assessment is apparently correct, if only marginally so.

reply to post by Praetorius


YES! Pretty much everybody that doesn't question THEM is not a terrorist.

Originally posted by HangTheTraitors
Any individual who is very religious in ANY of the three Abrahamic cults can VERY easily become a dangerous individual.

I was Christian for long enough myself, that I know this to be the case.

However, in fairness, Islam is really the only branch of Semitic monotheism that I have seen, about which the claim can be made, that there is direct theological justification for violence. In the Jewish case, the justification can only be made via historical precedent. In the Christian case, there is no direct theological justification for violence at all.

The single biggest problem with Christianity, in theological terms, is Christ's alleged claim that, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me." This is a claim of spiritual exclusivity, and ultimately it ends up causing the same attitude that exists more directly within Islam; convert the planet, and to quote Midnight Oil, "Disagree, and you get annihilated."

Believing in fairy tales, and fairy tale characters

Atheistic condescension is just as ugly as Semitic dogmatism. It is no more worthy of being tolerated.

reply to post by pthena


I seem to be saying this a lot around here, but, as a Muslim woman educated in Sharia for a good 20 years of my life, I think you fully understand the meaning of Jihad.

Jihad as a word comes from the Arabic: Ijtihad, meaning: to strive for...

So the essential gist means: to strive for the greater good or justice.

And yes, fighting is a MUST for a Muslim, who sees oppression and injustice perpetrated by those in higher power. Fighting is not bad...going to war is not bad in Islam. Because going to war means calling out your enemy and giving them the opportunity to defend themselves while they fight on equal grounds. Its a match. A testimony of courage especially when you consider the historical stage in which Islam was born on: a bunch of citizens fighting against tribal leaders with extreme power. Under such conditions, they were encouraged to get up and fight. Because the general consensus was, to sit and be afraid of the powers that oppress them.

But is fighting the ONLY way to live in Islam? Ofcourse not.

Taking the whole of the Quran in meaning: "do not be among those who transgress" is repeated over and over. There is a time for war and a time for peace. Breaking bounds is not an option.

If I may also be allowed to say that I support people getting up to study the Quran by itself, but its lacking if you don't study the history of the area and the events that LEAD to the verses being sent in the Quran. For each verse was sent after a specific event, for a very good reason.

Under the tutelage of such information, no educated Muslim can say that fighting under secrecy, using spies, and blowing up buildings (like the way Al-Qaeda works) without an open and fair arena for fighting, is approved by God. God would never approve such a cowardly way of fighting..to hit and run...fighting needs to be open, on equal grounds, with the leaders facing each other in war instead of sitting in their comfy rooms hitting buttons to kill people in the other side of the world.

reply to post by petrus4

Originally posted by petrus4
Then why does their Prophet himself say otherwise? Muhammed states that he considers it a divine directive to coerce the entire world to "confess that there is no God but Allah, and I am his Messenger."

Does he? Where? If there is an actual hadith stating as such, then it most definitely goes against the Quran (which is the undeniable higher authority for muslims), and thus this saying of Muhammad would be considered unauthentic and weak- this process has been done with thousands of hadith.

Originally posted by petrus4
It can be established that Christian violence is not consistent with the example of Jesus Christ.

I am not sure I can so easily agree with that. It is an established fact by all traditional denominations of Christianity that Jesus will return to unleash all manner of whoop-ass on his enemies, basically killing them all. Another example is Jesus's behaviour with the money-lenders. Another is Jesus telling his disciples to buy swords.

And as for your claim about the Jewish precedent for violence only being a "historical" precedent, the Hebrew scripture places no such limitation- there are direct, universal commands that can be taken IN CONTEXT to advocate violence, and not just with "it's only against THESE people" or "only for THIS particular occasion"- although even the passages advocating violence against only a specific group at a specific time have been picked up by certain groups in today's world (you can find them by their likening of the Palestinians to the Amelekites).

Originally posted by petrus4
The problem comes in when there is apparent Qu'ranic support for things which are empirically, demonstrably socially harmful, such as female circumcision

But see, this again comes back to ignorance about the tenets of Islam. There is NO injuction, no mention, even, of female circumcision in the Quran.

Originally posted by babloyi
reply to post by petrus4

 

Originally posted by petrus4
Then why does their Prophet himself say otherwise? Muhammed states that he considers it a divine directive to coerce the entire world to "confess that there is no God but Allah, and I am his Messenger."

Does he? Where? If there is an actual hadith stating as such, then it most definitely goes against the Quran (which is the undeniable higher authority for muslims), and thus this saying of Muhammad would be considered unauthentic and weak- this process has been done with thousands of hadith.

Truthfully, the one thing I'm beginning to wish I could do where Muhammed is concerned, is conduct a seance. It's a shame the guy isn't still alive...then someone could sit down with him and talk it out, once and for all.

I also say this because let's face it; scriptures cannot necessarily be considered completely reliable. I don't believe, as one example, that the claim of spiritual exclusivity attributed to Jesus, ("I am the way, the truth, and the life,") is something he would have really said, but rather was something inserted by Catholicism in order to maintain control. The Jesus Christ that I believe in, personally, would have had a lot more sense. He would have known how such a statement could have been misinterpreted, and what the consequences of such would have been.

Originally posted by petrus4
I am not sure I can so easily agree with that. It is an established fact by all traditional denominations of Christianity that Jesus will return to unleash all manner of whoop-ass on his enemies, basically killing them all.

What denominations believe, and what the book itself actually says, are almost always two completely different things. I'd truthfully be more inclined to discuss Christian theology with the Dalai Lama, than I would with the current Pope.

Another example is Jesus's behaviour with the money-lenders.

In other cases, I discourage it, but extreme violence is probably the only truly divine response to Capitalism. More than anything else, it is the one truly lethal, long term threat to human survival. I view money as the blood of Raktabija, personally. Jesus would have recognised that.

Another is Jesus telling his disciples to buy swords.

Yep. He then also tells Peter at least not to use it.

Originally posted by petrus4
The problem comes in when there is apparent Qu'ranic support for things which are empirically, demonstrably socially harmful, such as female circumcision

But see, this again comes back to ignorance about the tenets of Islam. There is NO injuction, no mention, even, of female circumcision in the Quran.

Wonderful. That is exactly what I am looking for. If the negative behaviours that Muslims engage in can be shown to be unfounded, on the basis of their own theology, then we have a legitimate basis to tell them to stop engaging in them.

reply to post by petrus4
I will have to leave defense of Islam up to Muslims such as nusnus, because I haven't read any of the hadiths or whatever documents comprise shariah law.

I read your excellent thread on 9/11: Why we actually need to forget and the blog piece you wrote:

www.mirshalak.net...
I believe that an international conspiracy of these individuals[psychopaths] is currently working tirelessly to bring about a singular, centralised global government, (the "New World Order") and that both this conspiracy and its' intent is literally demonic in origin. The ultimate logical extension of this conspiracy's process, is the initial subjugation, followed by the rapid extinction of, both humanity and most other forms of life on Earth. I am inclined to believe that this conspiracy has been active for at least the last 25,000 years. This conspiracy's process has been allowed to proceed closer to fruition than I personally am comfortable with, at the current time. My intent is not to allow it to proceed further.

Our intents are the same. In my own way, I believe that the NWO is actually pushing for a Zionist dream of theocracy under a messianic figure, world empire, centered in ethnically cleansed Jerusalem, with all subject nations paying tribute tax to Jerusalem. And that's all Biblical, Torah, Prophets, Psalms, New Testament book of Revelation.

More over, the plan has already succeeded almost completely in the U.S. see: US Ambassador: Support for Israel Drives All US Mideast Policies and Congress' Tainted View of Middle East

The worshipful fetishist fawning over the so-called Jewish state of Israel is almost 100% in U.S. Congress. A religion called Judeo-Christian is the de facto religion in America. The alliance is specifically warned about in the Koran. Think of Islam as those people without any excuse if they don't recognize the threat. The counter balance, if you will.

How did the US go insane completely after Cold War ended? The counter balance of USSR was removed. Delusions of grandeur entered the minds of the one world hegemon (U.S.) I am very much less in favor of seeing Islam removed than I am in hind-sight of USSR removed.

It can be said without qualification, that America is the single most degenerate, relentlessly destructive human culture that has ever existed, bar none. You can love your country as much as you like, but if you are going to be remotely objective, that cannot be honestly denied.

Yes, without qualification. And getting worse under the influence of Judeo-Christian religion. Without the counter-balance doom will come quickly. Until humans can grow a decent sense of mutual respect for one and all, it is better for the counter balance to remain as long as Judeo-Christian religion wields the iron scepter of military power.

reply to post by nusnus

If I may also be allowed to say that I support people getting up to study the Quran by itself, but its lacking if you don't study the history of the area and the events that LEAD to the verses being sent in the Quran. For each verse was sent after a specific event, for a very good reason.

Indeed, you are allowed. I know that to be true. Unfortunate for me that I don't seem to have the time to read all the hadiths and some other materials not even translated into English.

no educated Muslim can say that fighting under secrecy, using spies, and blowing up buildings (like the way Al-Qaeda works) without an open and fair arena for fighting, is approved by God. God would never approve such a cowardly way of fighting..to hit and run...fighting needs to be open, on equal grounds, with the leaders facing each other in war instead of sitting in their comfy rooms hitting buttons to kill people in the other side of the world.

Yes. That recalled to my mind an actual Qur'an section. I can't find it right now. I read Qur'an in one translation, but have a different translation in electronic media for easy word search, causes some difficulty in finding specific passages. But yes, devious spy type activity is exposed as slimey and rotten, not encouraged at all.

Originally posted by petrus4

Truthfully, the one thing I'm beginning to wish I could do where Muhammed is concerned, is conduct a seance.

It's a shame the guy isn't still alive...then someone could sit down with him and talk it out, once and for all.

I also say this because let's face it; scriptures cannot necessarily be considered completely reliable. I don't believe, as one example, that the claim of spiritual exclusivity attributed to Jesus, ("I am the way, the truth, and the life,") is something he would have really said, but rather was something inserted by Catholicism in order to maintain control. The Jesus Christ that I believe in, personally, would have had a lot more sense. He would have known how such a statement could have been misinterpreted, and what the consequences of such would have been.

Wonderful. That is exactly what I am looking for. If the negative behaviours that Muslims engage in can be shown to be unfounded, on the basis of their own theology, then we have a legitimate basis to tell them to stop engaging in them.

Honestly a lot of Muslims nowadays feel the same way about 'talking to the Prophet Muhammad'. They wish he was around and what not so they could ask him personally. I on the other hand don't feel the need to do this simply because the answer is out there but it needs an actual ability to read and research information, which most people lack nowadays.

And pthena is right. The only way to validate a hadith is to use the Quranic base and see if it fits the general gist of the message. If it doesn't its considered suspicious and attributed to be so, so that Muslims may take it with a grain of salt.

But again, in order to understand the detail information within the hadith or the Quran one needs to understand the entire gist of the message. According to Islam, God sent down written orders for a number of reasons:1. humans had forgotten what their innate right and wrong was (or were being lead to forget). 2. written laws were sent so humans can establish SOCIAL unity. Religion is more about human rights amongst humans and less about how humans should worship God. Because believe it or not God does not care about the outward look or the specific way in which people pray. Because its their heart that really matters. But some people need clear cut frame to work in, honestly most people need this because they are simple beings. And not to mention the fact that humans are always busy breaking each others rights. According to Islam, God does not forgive two things: the worship of other things and the taking of another humans rights.

God is one, and the One has been sending the same message since the beginning of time. Constant reminders of the SAME meaning: Worship only 1, stop killing each other and eating each others rights. Stop causing havoc. etc.
Hence, Islam is not a religion that came to erase all the other good messages that God has sent before. It is simply the most renewed, detailed and the only locked one.

Also, according to Islamic scripture, Jesus was the one and only thru which people could come to God, AT THAT VERY POINT IN TIME. He didn't mean his body. He meant his message. And while he was alive, there weren't any other messengers. He was definitely the only one spreading the message so to speak. But the Christian understanding is a very literal one. They take it to mean that he was the last one. As far as I know, he never said he was the last one.

Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by petrus4
I will have to leave defense of Islam up to Muslims such as nusnus, because I haven't read any of the hadiths or whatever documents comprise shariah law.

I've written to nusnus a couple of times, and have come to think very highly of her. I think her perspective is reasonably similar to my own; in that while at times at least, Islamic theology itself is fine, Islam currently has a lot of people who for various reasons are engaging in violent, dangerous, and aberrant behaviour.

Our intents are the same. In my own way, I believe that the NWO is actually pushing for a Zionist dream of theocracy under a messianic figure, world empire, centered in ethnically cleansed Jerusalem, with all subject nations paying tribute tax to Jerusalem. And that's all Biblical, Torah, Prophets, Psalms, New Testament book of Revelation.

Ironically, my own reasons for believing in what the cabal are up to didn't so much come from Revelations, as I never really understood that. I did, at one point however, get into astrology, and learned about the procession of the ages, which is apparently also one of the key doctrines of Theosophy.

Basically you have a scenario where every 25,000 years or so, (the time it takes for a complete orbit of the zodiac, in blocks of 2150 years per sign) planet Earth gets hit with a giant press of the reset button. Sometimes that's caused by local disasters, other times by weird space weather, but the long and the short of it is, that it always seems to happen at about the same time.

During at least the last two of these periods, the gang that we currently know and love as the Illuminati, have been trying to establish the type of scenario outlined in the Georgia Guidestones; minimal human population, those that are here are enslaved, living in fear and misery, and dancing to their tune generally, etc etc.

They had a major setback though, which was back when Atlantis blew up at the end of the last orbit. The rest of humanity lost a lot of ground then, technologically and in various other respects, but they did too. One of their games, however, is the ability to know when a cataclysm is coming in advance, and then plan their shananigans around it. Sometimes that means trying to bury all evidence of existing cultures before the end of the previous orbit. We're a lot easier to manipulate if we have total amnesia after each reset.

They're probably closer to getting their way at this point than they ever have been previously; however the point is, that they weren't divinely intended to rule the planet. What they *were* intended to do, was to act as catalysts for us to recognise and regain our own sovereignty, and prevent them from ruling us in the process. We haven't done that though, which is why we have the current mess.

The psychopaths (or STS polarised, or Lizard Hearted, as Amaterasu calls them; take your pick) will probably always be around, to some extent or another, but basically we were meant to have a scenario with them which is ironically very close to what you've described with America and Russia. As in, they play minor versions of their evil games every now and then, we recognise what is going on and slap them back down, but that helps us grow developmentally in the process, and on it goes. The fact that they're running the show currently, is a massive state of imbalance, (which could potentially do irreversible damage, if they truly get their way) and we seriously need to correct it.

Originally posted by pthena
Indeed, you are allowed. I know that to be true. Unfortunate for me that I don't seem to have the time to read all the hadiths and some other materials not even translated into English.

Well thats why people like me who have actually done the historical readings, and constantly do so need to come out and give the right information so people are not confused.

Im constantly checking back and forth and correcting my own information so as not to give the wrong info no matter how small. But I've been taught that the message needs to be listened as a whole, and understood in the gist. Because Islam allows for that kind of leeway. Life is not mentioned in Quran as a whole. Only the most basic stuff are. God has done this on purpose so people can think for themselves...thus a certain amount of leeway is given so people can make mistakes and learn through those mistakes. So people can sin. Yes God wants that. He does want us to sin so we can repent. Its like darkness and light existing in the same balance. You cannot be a constantly repenter and you cannot be a constant sinner. Somethings gotta give. But I digress.

reply to post by petrus4

Basically you have a scenario where every 25,000 years or so, (the time it takes for a complete orbit of the zodiac, in blocks of 2150 years per sign) planet Earth gets hit with a giant press of the reset button. Sometimes that's caused by local disasters, other times by weird space weather, but the long and the short of it is, that it always seems to happen at about the same time.

During at least the last two of these periods, the gang that we currently know and love as the Illuminati, have been trying to establish the type of scenario outlined in the Georgia Guidestones; minimal human population, those that are here are enslaved, living in fear and misery, and dancing to their tune generally, etc etc.

So much to look up, so little time! Georgia Guidestones added to list of things to look into. But what you wrote reminded me of a Science Fiction book I read, probably way back in circa 1970.

Lest Darkness Fall Lest Darkness Fall is an alternate history science fiction novel written in 1939 by author L. Sprague de Camp.
. . .
American archaeologist Martin Padway is visiting the Pantheon in Rome in 1938. A thunderstorm arrives, lightning cracks, and he finds himself transported to 6th century Rome (AD 535).

A MS Word 10 version is here, in .rar archive. So unrar type program required, many free file archive programs available. I was able to open the .doc file in Open Office.
Download page

Padway decides to use his knowledge of history in order to change the events of the past, to prevent the arrival of The Dark Ages. I, similarly am here now, in the present, attempting to prevent the newly arriving dark age. But I'm not from the future. I'm from the past, 1956 precisely, when I was born. I don't know the future, but that does not excuse me from trying to the best of my ability. As some one once wrote:

MT 16:2 He replied, "When evening comes, you say, `It will be fair weather, for the sky is red,' 3 and in the morning, `Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.

Yet evidently some can interpret the signs of the times. They ought to try something then, to preserve life. As you have written, "we recognise what is going on and slap them back down, but that helps us grow developmentally in the process, and on it goes."

reply to post by pthena

The worshipful fetishist fawning over the so-called Jewish state of Israel is almost 100% in U.S. Congress. A religion called Judeo-Christian is the de facto religion in America. The alliance is specifically warned about in the Koran. Think of Islam as those people without any excuse if they don't recognize the threat. The counter balance, if you will.

Thank Allah (if it is appropriate to say that) for that and I hope people thank Qaddafi for doing whatever he could towards fighting evil.

Originally posted by pthena
So much to look up, so little time! Georgia Guidestones added to list of things to look into.

The Georgia Guidestones basically provide an outline of the psychopathic/STS elite's victory conditions.

"LET THESE BE GUIDESTONES TO AN AGE OF REASON"

1. MAINTAIN HUMANITY UNDER 500,000,000 IN PERPETUAL BALANCE WITH NATURE

2. GUIDE REPRODUCTION WISELY - IMPROVING FITNESS AND DIVERSITY

3. UNITE HUMANITY WITH A LIVING NEW LANGUAGE

4. RULE PASSION - FAITH - TRADITION - AND ALL THINGS WITH TEMPERED REASON

5. PROTECT PEOPLE AND NATIONS WITH FAIR LAWS AND JUST COURTS

6. LET ALL NATIONS RULE INTERNALLY RESOLVING EXTERNAL DISPUTES IN A WORLD COURT

7. AVOID PETTY LAWS AND USELESS OFFICIALS

8. BALANCE PERSONAL RIGHTS WITH SOCIAL DUTIES

9. PRIZE TRUTH - BEAUTY - LOVE- SEEKING HARMONY WITH THE INFINITE

10. BE NOT A CANCER ON THE EARTH - LEAVE ROOM FOR NATURE - LEAVE ROOM FOR NATURE

The UN's Agenda 21 goes into this some more as well, if you can find it. AFAIK that has been taken offline, because they didn't want people finding what it described in such stark terms.

Basically, they're talking about implementing Hell on Earth. A scenario where 95% of the human population is dead, and where they've used chemtrails, HAARP, and various other means to render most other life extinct, so that the planet becomes largely a barren waste. The remaining half billion people would be perpetually miserable, terrified slaves; kept under the perpetual heel of a highly technological, singular global government. Given the current state of the environment, it would rapidly lead to the extinction even of that remnant, as well.

We have to avoid them attaining this scenario at virtually any cost. Unfortunately, very few people are aware of this possibility. Most of them are too distracted by things like Call of Duty, or the latest viral videos on YouTube.

reply to post by jmdewey60

Thank Allah (if it is appropriate to say that) for that and I hope people thank Qaddafi for doing whatever he could towards fighting evil.

Thank Allah, whoever recognizes Allah.
Rather than Gaddafi thank those Libyan people that don't allow U.S., NATO, and the West to dictate who they are. Compare Qaddafi's 42 year reign with the 40 year mythological reign of Solomon.

Muammar Gaddafi - Wikipedia
Colonel Gaddafi, was the autocratic ruler of Libya from 1969, when he seized power in a military coup, until August 2011
. . .
His 42-year rule prior to the Civil War makes him the fourth longest-ruling non-royal leader since 1900, as well as the longest-ruling Arab leader.[2] He variously styled himself as 'the Brother Leader', 'Guide of the Revolution' and the 'King of Kings'.

After seizing power in 1969, he abolished the Libyan Constitution of 1951 and imposed laws based on his political ideology.[3] Gaddafi formulated an ideology, calling it the Third International Theory and publishing it in The Green Book.[4][5] Gaddafi and his relatives took over much of the economy.

Summary of Solomon's reign given by Rehoboam, son of Solomon:

1KI 12:12 Three days later Jeroboam and all the people returned to Rehoboam, as the king had said, "Come back to me in three days." 13 The king answered the people harshly. Rejecting the advice given him by the elders, 14 he followed the advice of the young men and said, "My father made your yoke heavy; I will make it even heavier. My father scourged you with whips; I will scourge you with scorpions." 15 So the king did not listen to the people, for this turn of events was from the LORD, to fulfill the word the LORD had spoken to Jeroboam son of Nebat through Ahijah the Shilonite.

1KI 12:16 When all Israel saw that the king refused to listen to them, they answered the king:
"What share do we have in David,
what part in Jesse's son?
To your tents, O Israel!
Look after your own house, O David!"

I don't know much about Gaddafi, but he does sort of remind me of that Solomon character.

reply to post by pthena
My understanding is that he was taken out because he was setting up a banking system which would compete with the Jewish run banking monopoly trying to take over control of all money.

reply to post by jmdewey60
Yes, I forgot that, U.S. and Nato seem to have ended Libyans sovereign monetary system, so as to allow international bankers to control Libya's economy. But this isn't a Libya thread. It's official US government repression of Muslim voice in US political sphere through spread of xenophobic propaganda.

I haven't decided yet what my next thread will be.

reply to post by pthena

Sorry about going off topic.
I was saying that there being some sort of counterbalance to the world Empire of anglo american israeli alliance, then that is a good thing but it seems the empire has a plan to dismantle its opposition, bit by bit and includes demonizing the religion of its opponent.

reply to post by jmdewey60
Yes, that's the plan. On an NPR interview this morning, the Palestinian Ambassador to UN and the US Ambassador to Israel were being interviewed concerning the upcoming US Veto of Palestinian statehood in UNSC. In at least one instance of US Amb. use of the word 'we', it was clearly meant, "I, and the rest of Israeli government". Wait! So US State department is now part of Israeli government?

Yes! According to US Ambassador Daniel Shapiro:

"The test of every policy the Administration develops in the Middle East is whether it is consistent with the goal of ensuring Israel’s future as a secure, Jewish, democratic state. That is a commitment that runs as a common thread through our entire government."
www.antiwar.com...

Sounds like a complete take over by a fifth column. Maybe that should be the subject of my next thread.