It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Arab Spring run amok: 'Brotherhood' starts crucifixions

page: 6
34
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 




The problem here is that you're trying to prove a negative - which is very difficult to do.


I do not have to prove anything! I am not trying to prove a negative at all.

Did it happen or not? Why is that so hard to answer?



The other problem is that you are basing this around crucifixion.


That is the topic up for discussion is it not? The OP authored a thread about crucifixion. Why would we then change the subject to anything but that particular topic?



So, what you are effectively saying is: "Oh, all of your arguments about the Muslim Brotherhood are just silly because they didn't kill anyone by crucifying them."


Absolutely not. I said nothing of the sort, nor have I given any reason for you or otehrs to think that. What I have been saying this whole time, quite clearly in fact, is that I reserve judgement until this has been proven. I want to know if the crucifixion occurred.

So did it?



Because the way the forum works, when you come across a news article, the headline must be part of your thread title. That's part of the rules. Then, when others try to say it didn't happen - you are going to counter the argument. Which is going to bias the entire discussion toward the subject of crucifixions - as that's the buzz-word that everyone focuses on.


You know what. You're right. The OP created a thread about MB crucifying people, but their comments were solely about Obama.

So he posted a story and decided to talk about something else....therefore I am not allowed to discuss the story in the OP....I can only talk about Obama?


I apologize. I was under the assumption that we would be discussing MB crucifixions, but instead this was about Obama's ME policy. Little did I know that this is the way these forums work.

I always thought that we were supposed to address the premises of the OP's article.

How stupid of me.




posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 



I do not have to prove anything!


Then why are you speaking?


Did it happen or not? Why is that so hard to answer?


Did what happen?

Crucifixion?

Or wanton violence?

You should also know that, since no recordings of the events have yet surfaced, piecing together the exact details of what happened is a fool's errand. Few people have accurate memories to begin with - even fewer have accurate memories while under stress. Further - human memory error is relatively unpredictable. Just because someone has reliable memories of other events does not mean they will have them regarding present or future events - or details surrounding those events.

Several studies have been done probing how extreme these errors can be. Around 50% of people will fail to recognize if the person they are talking to has been swapped out with another in a face-to-face conversation (if line of sight is broken to allow the switch). To be fair - it has to be a male swapped out with a male (or female swapped out with a female) - and extreme variances in physical structure or vocal tones will raise a flag with the subject - but the fact is that unless it is someone you are familiar with - they can be exchanged with other individuals and your mind will be none the wiser.


That is the topic up for discussion is it not? The OP authored a thread about crucifixion. Why would we then change the subject to anything but that particular topic?


Is it really about crucifixion?

Is a birthday about fiery candles?


Absolutely not. I said nothing of the sort, nor have I given any reason for you or otehrs to think that. What I have been saying this whole time, quite clearly in fact, is that I reserve judgement until this has been proven. I want to know if the crucifixion occurred.


So I can form a mob of idealists believing in a sort of "Order of the Red Queen" and wantonly kill people out of the spirit of inter-species competition.

Judging that event, however, must wait for you to determine whether or not I crucified any of the victims.


I apologize. I was under the assumption that we would be discussing MB crucifixions, but instead this was about Obama's ME policy. Little did I know that this is the way these forums work.


For someone with such a fetish for stovepipes, you really have an ignorance to the forks in your selected pipe.

You cannot dictate how a forum works. A forum works however the people in it want to work.

Let me lay it out for you:

What are people, here, going to do about this? Go into Egypt and fight the Muslim Brotherhood?

A few delusional types might have fantasies of single-handedly dismantling the Muslim Brotherhood, but let's be real - no one is going to do that.

However, our governments (both the U.S. and many in Europe - which would represent a majority of the people participating in this forum) supported the "Arab Spring" despite the many cautions from numerous advisers that the Muslim Brotherhood was both coordinating these revolutions and that this group was radical and decidedly anti-western.

That, we can do something about.

Which is why it is the focus of discussion.

Bluntly - we really don't care about the people killed in Egypt. It's simply not human nature to be seriously impacted by events we have little means of identifying with.

None of us do.

You care about the factual accuracy of the claim that there were crucifixions.

The majority really couldn't care less how people were killed. The fact is that people were killed and the Muslim Brotherhood behind orchestrating these violent displays. Our governments supported this group and attempted to placate concerns that this group would do exactly what we see going on now.


I always thought that we were supposed to address the premises of the OP's article.


That premise is different things to different people.

You seem to think the premise is crucifixion.

Many others don't. The premise for them is the violent nature of the events and the support of them by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Take the Porter incident. The headline read: "US Navy Destroyer Hits Japanese Oil Tanker" (all of them).

In reality - it was the other way around. The tanker hit the destroyer. That 'error' in detail, however, doesn't change the fact that a destroyer was heavily damaged by someone's mistake and that it will end up costing into the tens of millions of dollars to repair (by time you figure in costs of putting the crew into berthing while the ship undergoes repairs, costs of repairs, etc).

But what was the discussion about? U.S. activity in the Strait of Hormuz.

Because no one could do anything about the particular incident - but they could potentially affect the policy of government.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


Proof as you say will never materialize because that would be an embarrassment for the United States Government. With all their monetary support of the Brotherhood and all this painting of the Brotherhood that US government has done, well, such proof will be hidden and shoved under a rug.

I am suprised this much of it got into media to be perfectly honest. So on this one, should this be the truth that the Brotherhood was crucifying people, then it is a thing we will never have proof of, simply too much embarrassment for the most powerful organisation in the world, the United States government.

I am certain they are sweeping as we speak.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 




Then why are you speaking?


Because I can. I'd like to know if this is true. But there is no burden of proof that lies on my shoulders.



Did what happen? Crucifixion? Or wanton violence?


How many times do I have to ask?

Follow along here..... Did the crucifixions happen?



You should also know that, since no recordings of the events have yet surfaced, piecing together the exact details of what happened is a fool's errand.


True. Then why did a few of these "media sources" claim there were crucifixions if there is no reason to believe it occurred?



Few people have accurate memories to begin with - even fewer have accurate memories while under stress. Further - human memory error is relatively unpredictable. Just because someone has reliable memories of other events does not mean they will have them regarding present or future events - or details surrounding those events. Several studies have been done probing how extreme these errors can be. Around 50% of people will fail to recognize if the person they are talking to has been swapped out with another in a face-to-face conversation (if line of sight is broken to allow the switch). To be fair - it has to be a male swapped out with a male (or female swapped out with a female) - and extreme variances in physical structure or vocal tones will raise a flag with the subject - but the fact is that unless it is someone you are familiar with - they can be exchanged with other individuals and your mind will be none the wiser.


So are you actually trying to say that there is no evidence of crucifixions because the witnesses forgot? Are you frinkin' kidding me? This is fodder of the highest degree.



Is it really about crucifixion?
Is a birthday about fiery candles?


When I see a man nailed to a birthday candle, I will take your analogy seriously. I cannot fathom what led you to make such a horribly irrelevant example.



You cannot dictate how a forum works. A forum works however the people in it want to work.


Are you trying to say that even though the OP was about the 'Brotherhood starts crucifixions' I am off topic and out of line for asking whether or not it happened?




You seem to think the premise is crucifixion.


Uhhhh, ya! YES IT IS! I can read and it says exactly that in the OP.

Should I write a thread about the NWO, and then tell people they are off topic because I want to talk about chemtrails?

Wow...I am out of my league here. It's becoming very clear that I am not welcome to question the validity of a particular claim because it contradicts the specific agenda of other members participating in the thread.

I love the fact though that in two threads concerning this issue, the same dialogue has taken place.

"Wow. Crucifixion. That's crazy. Did it actually happen?"

"It doesn't matter! Obama...MB.....ugggg....radical Islam..."

Apparently common sense is rare anymore.


edit on 20-8-2012 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by sheepslayer247
 



Because I can.


Precisely.


How many times do I have to ask?

Follow along here..... Did the crucifixions happen?


And how many times must you evade the question of just how relevant the topic of crucifixion is?


True. Then why did a few of these "media sources" claim there were crucifixions if there is no reason to believe it occurred?


Is there reason to doubt the crucifixions occurred?


So are you actually trying to say that there is no evidence of crucifixions because the witnesses forgot? Are you frinkin' kidding me? This is fodder of the highest degree.


I suppose I over-estimated your intellectual capacity. I apologize.

I am saying that, in these areas, much of your news reporting is done from eyewitness testimony. There will be people who remember things that didn't happen. There will be people who don't remember things that did happen. And you will have people who remember events out of sequence or with different causal effects tied to them.

Your argument seems to be from the perspective of someone who perceives this as being an orderly event - like Roman crucifixions. Everyone stood around and cheered as people were nailed to trees and suffer for hours on end. There was a 'mob' - but there was order.

But that's not what happened. It wasn't a trial or an execution. It was a mob rampage with lynchings of various types taking place simultaneously. The only order was that the mob's rage was being expressed at the same time. Even who that rage was expressed against was not orderly - some were more after media while others were more after symbols of culture they did not approve of (and propagators of those symbols).

A few people probably ended up nailed to a tree and/or the side of a building. A group of, maybe, 30 people would be directly involved in such a sequence of events and everyone else is left to piece together exactly how those people ended up nailed to a tree - and whether or not they were alive or dead when they were put there.


When I see a man nailed to a birthday candle, I will take your analogy seriously. I cannot fathom what led you to make such a horribly irrelevant example.


Again, I over-estimated your intellectual capacity. Again, I apologize for setting you up to fail.

A mob riot is not about crucifixions, is it?

A birthday cake is not about flaming candles, correct?

Your argument is, essentially: "I don't see any flaming candles, so I don't believe it's your birthday."


Are you trying to say that even though the OP was about the 'Brotherhood starts crucifixions' I am off topic and out of line for asking whether or not it happened?


No.

Here's what you're saying:

"You're making an issue out of a non-issue! The crucifixions didn't happen!"

Here's what the forum discussion has mostly been about:

"Our government is supporting radicals and publicly lying/ignorant to their blatantly violent nature."

Which is why you're hopelessly lost and confused.


"Wow. Crucifixion. That's crazy. Did it actually happen?"

"It doesn't matter! Obama...MB.....ugggg....radical Islam..."

Apparently common sense is rare anymore.


Crucifixion happens all the time. We, in our civilized little bubble, don't hear about it. Not that there is much to be heard - it's common in the tribal structures dominating the middle east, and it's largely a "family affair" that doesn't get much attention at all.

The focus on crucifixion is an artifact of our own inexperience. We don't say: "Wow, that's crazy - a large group of people beat people to death or hung them from water towers? Did that really happen?" - because that sort of behavior is not shocking to us. There's not much reason to doubt it happened nor is there much reason to place buzzword focus on it.

But crucifixions... we're inexperienced with that. Most of us - our only experience with it is depictions of it in religious symbols and traditions - even to the point where some fail to realize the Romans crucified thousands each year (they seem to think it was developed especially for Jesus or something).

Which is why the media uses it as a buzzword/event and westerners have an inherent rejection of that event happening. "Whoa.... wait... crucifixion? That's pretty extreme."

But over in this area, it's really not. Sure - it's a horrible way to die - but that's kind of the idea - you're not being put to death for your comfort. There are still quite a few places over here that cut off hands for stealing or who execute married women on the spot for getting caught out in public with a man she's not related to.

So... did crucifixion happen? It could have. It could be a product of flawed human memory.

Were people violently killed? That we can be sure of.



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 




And how many times must you evade the question of just how relevant the topic of crucifixion is?


I have never evaded the relevance. I believe it is very relevant for many reasons...such as:

The sources that released this story, without confirmation, have exposed themselves as untrustworthy. Websites like WND and others have made it quit clear that they may be agenda-driven and their integrity has been compromised.

It also exposes certain people on ATS as to how they conduct themselves in the face of false information. That is very important to know in dealing with them in future discussions.

How many times do I have to ask? Did it or did it not?



Is there reason to doubt the crucifixions occurred?


Of course. Any reasonable person would doubt anything occurred if their was no evidence. The real question is:

Is there any reason to believe the crucifixions did occur?

The scientific process rarely works in reverse....but that is the premise you're working from.



Your argument seems to be from the perspective of someone who perceives this as being an orderly event - like Roman crucifixions.


No. My argument comes from the fact that I cannot have an opinion about something that did not happen. How do you expect to convince someone about your opinion when the initial premise cannot be proven, and may be an outright lie?



Again, I over-estimated your intellectual capacity. Again, I apologize for setting you up to fail.


Ahhh, so you have to stoop to personal attacks? You have to insult my intelligence? Well that's fine. But let me give a great example of failure.



Your argument is, essentially: "I don't see any flaming candles, so I don't believe it's your birthday."


Talk about fail! Even attempting to make that correlation reeks of bad judgment and irrelevancy. I could care less about someone's birthday. I do care if someone was nailed to a tree.

Forgive me if I find the example to be poor. In now way does it portray an intelligent correlation and looks more like a straw-grab more than anything else.



Which is why you're hopelessly lost and confused.


Maybe you're right. I do this thing called "thinking" and after reading the OP's article I thought the thread would be about crucifixion. How silly considering the OP was about crucifixion.

But after people came into the threads and said "Hey....it didn't happen." People began to concentrate on "Our government is supporting radicals and publicly lying/ignorant to their blatantly violent nature."

That's called deflection...or changing the subject if you will.



The focus on crucifixion is an artifact of our own inexperience.


No, it's a product of reading the OP.



So... did crucifixion happen? It could have. It could be a product of flawed human memory.


You can't say it can you? You will not admit that it did not happen, will you? Talk about agenda. That's called self-exposure.

It could be a product of a knee-jerk bunch of scared bigots that will go as far as to lie just to get their readers to clutch their pearls.

Your continued deflection and irrelevant arrogance, mixed with a bit of personal attacks, has made it quite clear that you have no desire to seek truth. You seek confirmation of agenda and will even throw the birthday candles with the kitchen sink as ammunition.

You have to do better then this.
edit on 20-8-2012 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
People please calm down...

I highly DOUBT that this actually happened...

If anyone here has studied the brother they will know that they are a basically secular and non islamic government, this is the reason why the cia and US supports them. They would never get away with doing something like this, outside the presidential palce my foot! Surely someone would have caught a video or picture. Especially in an Egypt more versed with alternative social media etc.

If you ask me this story is a clear fake...



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join