When will the truth of Islam out?

[aurum]

Originally Posted by lakes

What is their god? What else supposedly comes from Sirius? Who also uses a 5 pointed star?

I've heard about this connection before- I can't vouch for the following information as I'm just not clued up enough, but there does seem to be an interesting connection in terms of high freemasonry...

Europe is rapidly being Islamized. Is the Muslim Brotherhood with its well-known Plan of Europe´s Islamisation behind it? Is it being helped by powerful Masons here? “We’re all Jesuits”, EU Council Pres. van Rompuy stated – and the Jesuits are the authors of Freemasonry.

On 7 Jan. 2015, Miry of the Miryline Blogspot has published an article which perhaps explains why the NWO is so eager to Islamize our countries as quickly as possible. Are the Shriner Masonic elite promoting this program? The Masons are especially strong in the US – but only weakly represented in Europe. However, they may have stronger helpers: The Muslim Brotherhood.

Miry´s Article: oath on the Koran
Unfortunately, there are still few videos of the Shriners, although they are so relevant, because in high Freemasonry, oaths are secretly sworn on the Koran. It is very surprising that this is not revealed diversely, so here again is a report of mine, which is supposed to detail the matter more



Many American presidents were Shriners and also wore the Shriner Hat. Today that is no longer officially supported. With Obama, there was a slip of the tongue at the swearing ceremony, so the oath had to be carried out again behind closed doors. I was not there, but I think the Koran was there the second time. Also in the speech of Rev. Warren before the swearing , the name of Jesus was named by his Islamic name of Isa.

Shriner lodges have hats with different names, not any hat wearing the name of “Ararat”. But each hat has the five-pointed star, the crescent and the sword. These are all Islamic symbols. No other proof is needed that here the violent Islam is indulged.

With many Shriner temples, this is even more apparent.

“The building, in the heart of the Bible Belt, is the Shriners mosque, built in 1922. The Shriners are a high level of Freemasonry. We asked a Shriner there what the Arabic writing meant, and he said it was just decoration; it doesn’t mean anything. We emailed a picture of it to friends in Israel and had it translated by Arab Christians there. It actually says: “No god but Allah.” (Quelle: THE FREE PRESS):





Star and crescent were also the symbol of the Ottoman Empire (Turkish empire). That fits, because Mount Ararat is located in Turkey.

Now, do you understand why any criticism of Islam is being stifled by (Masonic) men of the state and the clergy as “racist” or “Islamophobic” ???

It’s as if the masters of the world want to establish Islam, it creeps in and destroys the good Christian culture. It is calculus and Islamic war strategy with the migration weapon.

...The Muslim Brotherhood is a Sufi Secret Society A.A.O.N.M.S. (the Shriners, too) – (A MASONIC ORDER)…
The Muslim Brotherhood is a Masonic Movement at heart – a financial organisation of Muslim elitists closely associated with the London City and the NWO and the Western intelligence services.

The lower Freemasons have no idea that the High Shriner Freemasons – like all high Masons – are working for the Jesuit General – due to Mason Fredrick the Great of Prussia, who wrote the High Degrees, the last 8 Degrees, of the Scottish Rite Freemasonry, in 1773.

...Obama´s brother, Malik, is an important member of the Muslim Brotherhood
Acc. to an Egyptian paper, US Muslim Pres. Obama is a full member of the Muslim Brotherhood, too. The Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic plan, the group’s mission in America, is a “civilization-jihadist process…a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within” by our hands.

http://new.euro-med.dk/20150108-shri...false-flag.php

[aurum]

From the comments to the above quoted article:

Shriners Oath

“Candidates for induction into the Shriners are greeted by a High Priest, who says:
“By the existence of Allah and the creed of Mohammed; by the legendary sanctity of our Tabernacle at Mecca, we greet you.”

The inductees then swear on the Bible and the Koran, in the name of Mohammed, and invoke Masonry’s usual gruesome penalties upon themselves:

“I do hereby, upon this Bible, and on the mysterious legend of the Koran, and its dedication to the Mohammedan faith, promise and swear and vow … that I will never reveal any secret part or portion whatsoever of the ceremonies … and now upon this sacred book, by the sincerity of a Moslem’s oath I here register this irrevocable vow … in willful violation whereof may I incur the fearful penalty of having my eyeballs pierced to the center with a three-edged blade, my feet flayed and I be forced to walk the hot sands upon the sterile shores of the Red Sea until the flaming sun shall strike me with livid plague, and may Allah, the god of Arab, Moslem and Mohammedan, the god of our fathers, support me to the entire fulfillment of the same. Amen. Amen. Amen.”

With this oath, Christians swear on the Koran, and declare Allah to be “the god of our fathers.”

Excerpt from The Origins and Influence of Masonry
by Lee Penn, SCP Journal Vol. 25:2-25:3 2001, Berkeley, CA 94704
—–
The Shriners building in Springfield Missouri, built in 1922, says in Arabic below the dome “there is no god but allah”.
—-
Freemasonary controlled by jewry intend to control all people and every country in the world.

“…Freemasons believe that they are the ones who will rule everything, but let us hear what is written in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.

Protocol n. 11 states:

‘We will create and put in effect the laws and the governments … in opportune moments … by means of national rebellions. … What we want is that the multitudes, disoriented by the revolt, still in a condition of terror and uncertainty, should understand once and for all that we are so strong, so untouchable, so powerful that in no way will we take into account their opinions and wishes. Instead we are ready and able to crush with irresistible power their manifestations at any moment and in every place. … Then, in fear and trembling, they will close their eyes to everything and await the consequences.
…
“For what purpose have we created this policy and insinuated it into the minds of the Masons, without giving them any possibility of examining its underlying meaning? … This is what has served as the basis for our secret organization of Masonry, whose existence is not known or even suspected by these cattle, attracted by us into the army of Masonic lodges.”

http://traditioninaction.org/History...obe_Jewsl.html

[iamawaveofthesea]

Each magian religion sets out to create a new world according to the consensus of the believers. So we have to figure out what that consensus is then ask ourselves if we agree with that consensus

To work out what the consensus is look at the holy book that contains the source code of the religious software. In this case it would be the koran. Then along with that they added hadiths which are anecdotes about the life of the prophet. Then despite the boast of many muslims that islam is not dependent on clergy like say judaism or christianity islam DID in fact develop its own scholar class of imams and they came up with a consensus called Ijma. These three things: koran, hadiths and ijma make up the code of the software of islam

On top of this the zionists created the wahhabist strain of islam and also there is a rift between sunnis and shia and there are many shia variants with some occultic strains

However we can when looking holistically discearn certain patterns; for example Islam does not generally afford the respect to women that european culture has. From neolithic goddess worship down to modern society europe has tended towards respect for women albeit with a rude interruption from the abrahamic religion christianity which was born from the patriarchal levantine religions such as judaism

So when we look at how modern feminists are defending the flooding of muslims into europe this doesn't make sense if you look at it through the prism of believing that 'feminism' is an organic movement focussed on creating equality between the sexes; if however you look at 'feminism' as largely a steered movement crafted and moulded from behind the scenes by marxists and communists (rothschild cabal) and pushed by them through the corporate-media they control and through the education system (which they infiltrated from the frankfurt school in the 1920's onwards) then this seeming contradiction begins to make more sense because seen through this prism we see that feminism as steered by the rothschild cabal is actually about weaponising female anger against men while the flooding of muslims into the west is really about destabilising the west to justify more centralised controls which will be offered by rothschild-communism eg a militarised, surveillance, police state

Both militant marxist feminism AND mass immigration are both two planks of a wider 'progressive agenda' aimed at altering society to breakdown societal cohesion and national soverignty and national identity in order to steer society towards totalitarian control under the rule of finance, under a command and control economy (communism) controlled by the rothschilds and their co-conspirator, bloodline dynasty families

[lakes]

Yes it is very interesting....the history of this cult and I will need to research the Shriners!

As to women....from Arabian Society In The Middle Ages, by Edward William Lane 1883

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/41110...-h/41110-h.htm

The wickedness of women is a subject upon which the stronger sex among the Arabs, with an affectation of superior virtue, often dwell in common conversation. That women are deficient in judgment or good sense is held as a fact not to be disputed even by themselves, as it rests on an assertion of the Prophet; but that they possess a superior degree of cunning is pronounced equally certain and notorious. Their general depravity is pronounced to be much greater than that of men. "I stood," said the Prophet, "at the gate of Paradise; and lo, most of its inmates were the poor: and I stood at the gate of Hell; and lo, most of its inmates were women." In allusion to women, the Khaleefeh ´Omar said, "Consult them, and do the contrary of what they advise."

Modesty is a requisite upon which too much stress cannot be laid; but this, to an English reader, requires some explanation. ´Alee asked his wife Fát?imeh, "Who is the best of women?" She answered, "She who sees not men, and whom they see not." Modesty, therefore, in the opinion of the Muslims, is most eminently shewn by a woman's concealing her person, and restraining her eyes, from men.

A girl is often married at the age of twelve years, and sometimes at ten, or even nine: the usual period is between twelve and sixteen years. At the age of thirteen or fourteen she may be a mother. The young men marry a few years later.

This book has some very revealing chapters....and I would have to now state that Muhammad was not a pedophilia!

In that 'time' it was thought 'normal' to betroth even an infant to another and no sexual union until after the 'girl' was over 12.
As far as I know the Vatican City has an age of consent still set at 12.

While I disagree with the above....it would seem to be of the 'time'!

Another thought....we are very likely to be approximately 100 years behind in our research?

I considered what I would do to stay well ahead of the 'mass'?

I would leave them in circles of information whilst I became something else....a corporation.

Once corporations gained the same (or more) rights as 'humans' why would I need secret societies to hide within?

I would not, but it would lead so very many into a dead end....round and round they go.

Governments are also corporation by the way.

All....and I mean ALL of man made religions are only for the purpose of control and misdirection.
They are so very many similar concepts within them....that they must all have been authored by the same multidimensional fear based limitation of a group mind.

[the mighty zhiba]

Brigitte Gabriel discusses 'moderate Muslims and suggests they are irelevent given that the 'moderate' people in any society are not the issue.

[lakes]

Originally Posted by the mighty zhiba

Brigitte Gabriel discusses 'moderate Muslims and suggests they are irelevent given that the 'moderate' people in any society are not the issue.

This is VERY correct and why many members of this forum are so very important.

Like I've said before, the middle of the herd is the unchanging part. The outer edge, the area of difference... controls all egress to change, all opportunity, and all chance of change. The outer edge controls the depth of view and all conditions that the norm (middle) can develop or have or be/live/exist --within/as.

Everything happens at the edge, everything happens in and because of that difference. Nothing at all ---can happen without it.

Thus, 'Normal..is for 'average'..which, when it comes to making a difference -- is absolutely nothing. Nothing at all. To be normal, is to be nothing. Stagnant swamp swill.

carmody 16-10-2012

[the nine]

Originally Posted by lakes

This book has some very revealing chapters....and I would have to now state that Muhammad was not a pedophilia!

In that 'time' it was thought 'normal' to betroth even an infant to another and no sexual union until after the 'girl' was over 12.
As far as I know the Vatican City has an age of consent still set at 12.

While I disagree with the above....it would seem to be of the 'time'!

I suppose the same could be said of the Kane and Abel story..
If there were no written commandments then at the time Kane killed Abel, then he cant have known it was forbidden by God can he?

[lakes]

Originally Posted by the nine

I suppose the same could be said of the Kane and Abel story..
If there were no written commandments then at the time Kane killed Abel, then he cant have known it was forbidden by God can he?

Agreed....and then that thought returns to morality and the concept of a 'human'?

Is a 'knowing' of the ideas of right and wrong inherent in man or are the concepts only indoctrinated?

Are 'humans' special or just intelligent animals?

This should be on topic but it does depend on the OP's intent when starting the thread?

Is a determination already implied or was discussion required as to the "Truth Of Islam"?

[lakes]

Originally Posted by the mighty zhiba

Brigitte Gabriel discusses 'moderate Muslims and suggests they are irelevent given that the 'moderate' people in any society are not the issue.

Good vid.... I would feel that progress was being made if she was talking about psychopaths.

You know instead of the word "Muslim" hear psychopath....then it is very correct....but she is probably a psycho, as are all who want to be in any form of authority?

[sin00]

When I got into this conspiracy theory stuff, starting out with Alex Jones, Infowars and Paul Joseph Watson and David Icke, it seemed obvious - Islam is not compatible with west and it's only going to get uglier in the future.

But then there's this conspiracy theory that elites are deliberately playing off the western world against the muslim world on purpose.

So what to make of it? I find myself perplexed on the issue. The idea that Islam is not compatible with the west still appears to be the truth - so if they come to the western world trying to impose their backward ways on us, then I suppose the Muslims that do this are to blame.

[aurum]

Originally Posted by lakes

Yes it is very interesting....the history of this cult and I will need to research the Shriners!

As to women....from Arabian Society In The Middle Ages, by Edward William Lane 1883

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/41110...-h/41110-h.htm


This book has some very revealing chapters....and I would have to now state that Muhammad was not a pedophilia!

In that 'time' it was thought 'normal' to betroth even an infant to another and no sexual union until after the 'girl' was over 12.
As far as I know the Vatican City has an age of consent still set at 12.

While I disagree with the above....it would seem to be of the 'time'!

...

He was in his fifties, whilst she was six years old...

You can argue that it perhaps wasn't necessarily unusual in terms of historical context, but we shouldn't need 'society' to define right from wrong for us. After all, the whole purpose of 'religion' should be about connection with the divine, not subscribing to the cultural norms of man. I won't detail my point any further because I feel the appropriate conclusions will be made by any right-minded person.

I would therefore have to question the mind-set of anyone who makes no effort to wrestle with these concepts in terms of their own belief system. I struggle to understand how anyone could look at their own six year old daughter and not wrestle with the same dilemmas...

And sadly the truth is that we're all programmed from cradle to grave. The programming in the West is incompatible with the programming of Islam- sensible debate is no longer possible because respective 'truths' are far too ingrained. I cannot see any middle ground. I read a lot of the comments on the video that Zhiba posted, trying to understand both perspectives- see things from both sides. But it's a clusterfuck- Muslims are resistant to Western ideologies and Westerners are resistant to Islamism. There is general agreement in terms of Western foreign policy but beyond that, the beliefs are just too diametrically opposed and way too deeply ingrained.

It was never going to end well.

Reaching some kind of mutual understanding doesn't seem the least bit likely. So what next? Because it's make-yer-mind-up time... it's no longer up for debate- that time has been and gone.

If we're dealing with Dar al-Harb, and we wouldn't be the first nation to find ourselves in that position, then without sounding too 'extremist' myself- it's time to start making some important decisions for yourself and your family. Because I only see things getting worse, honestly.

[lakes]

Originally Posted by aurum

He was in his fifties, whilst she was six years old...

You can argue that it perhaps wasn't necessarily unusual in terms of historical context, but we shouldn't need 'society' to define right from wrong for us. After all, the whole purpose of 'religion' should be about connection with the divine, not subscribing to the cultural norms of man. I won't detail my point any further because I feel the appropriate conclusions will be made by any right-minded person.

I would therefore have to question the mind-set of anyone who makes no effort to wrestle with these concepts in terms of their own belief system. I struggle to understand how anyone could look at their own six year old daughter and not wrestle with the same dilemmas...

And sadly the truth is that we're all programmed from cradle to grave. The programming in the West is incompatible with the programming of Islam- sensible debate is no longer possible because respective 'truths' are far too ingrained. I cannot see any middle ground. I read a lot of the comments on the video that Zhiba posted, trying to understand both perspectives- see things from both sides. But it's a clusterfuck- Muslims are resistant to Western ideologies and Westerners are resistant to Islamism. There is general agreement in terms of Western foreign policy but beyond that, the beliefs are just too diametrically opposed and way too deeply ingrained.

It was never going to end well.

Reaching some kind of mutual understanding doesn't seem the least bit likely. So what next? Because it's make-yer-mind-up time... it's no longer up for debate- that time has been and gone.

If we're dealing with Dar al-Harb, and we wouldn't be the first nation to find ourselves in that position, then without sounding too 'extremist' myself- it's time to start making some important decisions for yourself and your family. Because I only see things getting worse, honestly.

As I stated "I DISAGREE with the above".

But a six year old within the time frame to be betrothed to a man would seem to have been very common. The 'marriage' took place on her 12th year as far as I can find, in which case the concept of 'sex' before the marriage would have been against Muslim law!
It was very necessary to 'wed' a virgin in the 'eyes of their god'....and nothing has changed, old rich men with young women in public and young girls in private.

I agree with your post and

It was never going to end well.

is correct.

IF we are within that territory....then I can only state that it is a natural function of this reality.

That to 'awake' a being which is pretending to 'sleep' it may be necessary to 'shake' them?

The rules of this game are not conducive to slumber.

[lakes]

Back in the time it was not strange to be betrothed at a young age in the UK:

The youngest monarch to marry was David II, who married Joan, daughter of Edward II when he was 4 years, 134 days old in 1328.

The youngest female monarch at the time of her marriage was Mary II, who was 15 years, 188 days old when she married William III in 1677.

The youngest queen consort was Isabella of Valois, who married Richard II when she was 6 years, 358 days old in 1396.


It does NOT make it correct but to pronounce one as a pedophile then you must judge ALL by the same level of thought.

[mranderson]

1. Subjugation of women - gender segregation
2. Marital Rape - wives are not allowed to refuse sex
3. Wife beating - the punishment for refusing sex
4. Adultery punishable by death - as long as four men witness the actual penetration.
5. Women's testimony considered half the worth of a man's Sharia court
6. Apostates - death penalty
7. Homosexuality - death penalty

You have to research this yourself , you have to find the names of the Imams who are operating in your local area and see for yourself what they are pushing for.

After you have done that , you realise what this is about.

They want Sharia Law , and nothing else will suffice. If you do not accept that, you are in the way of ''progress''

[lakes]

Originally Posted by mranderson

1. Subjugation of women - gender segregation
2. Marital Rape - wives are not allowed to refuse sex
3. Wife beating - the punishment for refusing sex
4. Adultery punishable by death - as long as four men witness the actual penetration.
5. Women's testimony considered half the worth of a man's Sharia court
6. Apostates - death penalty
7. Homosexuality - death penalty

You have to research this yourself , you have to find the names of the Imams who are operating in your local area and see for yourself what they are pushing for.

After you have done that , you realise what this is about.

They want Sharia Law , and nothing else will suffice. If you do not accept that, you are in the way of ''progress''

Yes I agree with your 'points'.

As I have quoted

The wickedness of women is a subject upon which the stronger sex among the Arabs, with an affectation of superior virtue, often dwell in common conversation. That women are deficient in judgment or good sense is held as a fact not to be disputed even by themselves, as it rests on an assertion of the Prophet; but that they possess a superior degree of cunning is pronounced equally certain and notorious. Their general depravity is pronounced to be much greater than that of men. "I stood," said the Prophet, "at the gate of Paradise; and lo, most of its inmates were the poor: and I stood at the gate of Hell; and lo, most of its inmates were women." In allusion to women, the Khaleefeh ´Omar said, "Consult them, and do the contrary of what they advise."

and

Modesty is a requisite upon which too much stress cannot be laid; but this, to an English reader, requires some explanation. ´Alee asked his wife Fát?imeh, "Who is the best of women?" She answered, "She who sees not men, and whom they see not." Modesty, therefore, in the opinion of the Muslims, is most eminently shewn by a woman's concealing her person, and restraining her eyes, from men.

I could 'pull' the information from old books backing all your points....but we must be correct in our determinations of over 1 billion other beings!

[cont]

Originally Posted by De Gothia

this is a silly photo comparison. it does not compare like with like. Residential building out in a small village in the sticks anywhere is going to look fairly ordinary compared to a temple built in a city.

I agree that Africa is backwards compared to other parts of the world but these images do not demonstrate that fact.

[quadrati]

Originally Posted by lakes

Back in the time it was not strange to be betrothed at a young age in the UK:

The youngest monarch to marry was David II, who married Joan, daughter of Edward II when he was 4 years, 134 days old in 1328.

The youngest female monarch at the time of her marriage was Mary II, who was 15 years, 188 days old when she married William III in 1677.

The youngest queen consort was Isabella of Valois, who married Richard II when she was 6 years, 358 days old in 1396.


It does NOT make it correct but to pronounce one as a pedophile then you must judge ALL by the same level of thought.

Theres a difference between the Monarchs and Mohammed.

One has a large influence in peoples lives to the point you might die if you criticize him or his ways.

Few, if any, really care what Kings and queens done in the past, nevermind know what they done.

[aurum]

Originally Posted by lakes

As I stated "I DISAGREE with the above".

But a six year old within the time frame to be betrothed to a man would seem to have been very common. The 'marriage' took place on her 12th year as far as I can find, in which case the concept of 'sex' before the marriage would have been against Muslim law!
It was very necessary to 'wed' a virgin in the 'eyes of their god'....and nothing has changed, old rich men with young women in public and young girls in private.

I agree with your post and



is correct.

IF we are within that territory....then I can only state that it is a natural function of this reality.

That to 'awake' a being which is pretending to 'sleep' it may be necessary to 'shake' them?

The rules of this game are not conducive to slumber.

Yes sorry Lakes I wasn't directing that at you- I understood the point you were making

[lakes]

Originally Posted by quadrati

Theres a difference between the Monarchs and Mohammed.

One has a large influence in peoples lives to the point you might die if you criticize him or his ways.

Few, if any, really care what Kings and queens done in the past, nevermind know what they done.

Really?

We are discussing past times and the adhered to supposed morality of THAT time period.

There is NO difference between the actions of one 'ruler' to another.

I also take it that you do not consider that the current 'ruler' of the UK has any influence upon you?

And....If you do not know the past then you will allow the same lack of intelligence and morals.

[quadrati]

Originally Posted by lakes

Really?

We are discussing past times and the adhered to supposed morality of THAT time period.

There is NO difference between the actions of one 'ruler' to another.

I also take it that you do not consider that the current 'ruler' of the UK has any influence upon you?

And....If you do not know the past then you will allow the same lack of intelligence and morals.

I never said there was a difference in their actions.

I'll make it clear. There is a difference in how they are both viewed now.

The queen has the influence on me in that she's head of state. But I don't get offended when her or her predecessors are insulted. I rarely think about her or her family and don't live my life by her words.

We'll be in agreement then about the lack of intelligence and morals of the past. Too bad some are still living their life from that time.