Muslim Brotherhood Starts Crucifixions. Is The U.S. Headed For Sharia Law?

reply to post by Jodlum66

All of you must obey the government rulers. Every person who rules was given the power to rule by God. And all the people that rule now were given that power by God. So the person that is against the government is really against something God has commanded. People that are against the government cause themselves to be punished.

This applies to only those in government whom are following God. If we follow anyone whom is not following God, we may very well find ourselves on the road to hell right along with the ones whom led us there.

If what you are saying is true, Then the Christians whom will not deny Christ Jesus and convert to Islam because Morsi is Islamic, and is the ruling government, are going against Christ. because they are not converting? This makes no sense my friend.

Pax

reply to post by paxnatus


Sounds like the Coptic Christians in Egypt should all get refugee status in the United States. Bet Obama won't agree to that.

Pray for your daughter this doesn't happen. Or see her raped then stoned for being a "whore".

If you ask me, the US needs a good dose of Sharia law to put people in check. I see a great deal of stupidity and nakedness and whoring on the streets and outside of the clubs and bars.

America has controlled the military in Egypt for years.

The army took over the country during the last coo.

Now we have a new ruler and any one who opposes him politically is being crucified.

Yep, sounds just like the people who lived there peacefully until the west took over.

Next you'll be telling us that Red Indians invented guns and shot themselves with them and we just took over to help out ♥

reply to post by buster2010

"I guess we could ask him the same thing about Israel huh? The Zionist carry out far more barbaric acts than the Muslims do. The Muslim brotherhood won the election so why shouldn't Obama meet with them. “

Here you go buster, same old tired empty rhetoric.
Well guess what, here are the numbers of Muslims killing Muslims:

wasteofmyoxygen.wordpress.com...

reply to post by paxnatus


Good thread paxnatus, S&F

To be honest, I have no idea what is going on here, but I share you concerns. seems to me like someone is putting all the pieces in the 'right' place on a chess board.
I will never forget Obama's first speech in Cairo and how quickly his administration turned its back on Mubarak.

reply to post by paxnatus


Seems to me like Obama's pretty much caught between a rock and a hard place - criticised if he tries to work with a democratically elected leader and criticised if he chooses not to.

Unless Obama and other 'western' leaders and nations choose to work with President Morsi and his administration, and by that I don't mean that they should ignore the unsavoury aspects of his regime, then Egypt could quite easily descend into something worse even than Afghanistan and Iraq with bloodshed and slaughter becoming common place.

And I really don't understand how you summise that Obama may be intending to implement Sharia in the US just from his invitation to President Morsi.

Originally posted by paxnatus
reply to post by buster2010

 

You do not meet with someone who is nailing human beings to trees, because they believe differently than you!!!!
What does Obama hope to accomplish? "Oh please don't nail anymore people to trees, America is just not down wit it" " Makin me look bad Bro"!!!

I cannot believe someone as intelligent as you could ask such a ridiculous question. Crucifixion??? Really??

A slow and excruciating death meant to disgrace and shame the person.....And this man should dine with the President of the United States?

edit on 8/17/2012 by paxnatus because: (no reason given)

First show proof of this actually being done. WND is hardly a credible source and even the links show no proof of this being done. Look into who has dined at the white house the Muslim brotherhood are boy scouts compared to them.

Originally posted by gravitational
reply to post by paxnatus

 

Good thread paxnatus, S&F

To be honest, I have no idea what is going on here, but I share you concerns. seems to me like someone is putting all the pieces in the 'right' place on a chess board.
I will never forget Obama's first speech in Cairo and how quickly his administration turned its back on Mubarak.

Mubarak was a brutal puppet dictator that America wasted billions on. America did a good thing turning our backs on him.

This thread is such fear-mongering dis info. Sounds like something Michelle Bachmann would write. The US has had diplomatic ties with Saudi Arabia forever, did that cause sharia law? Think critically, if the USA was going to turn into a theocracy it would turn into a Christian one if anything....but we have a constitution and supreme court rulings, so that is not going to happen.

How does anyone seriously think the US is heading for Sharia law, the USA population has a general disdain for Muslims and are majority christian. Please stop reading WND....

reply to post by paxnatus

Morsi openly admits that he is playing a game with the U.S. Does Obama not know this? This honestly scares me.

Obama is muslim, he admitted it himself. Not only that but his dad was a muslim and the children of a muslim father will be born muslim...and that "preacher" Wright who liked to shout "God damn america!" in his sermons while the congegration (and Obama and Michelle were all cheering).





So that being said Obama is playing his own game. Do you not find it interesting that every nation since Arab Spring landed in MB hands? Or that Libya and Egypt are now in MB hands and the last to go down will be Syria. We all know whats coming. I just hope the M.E. christians know what i know, or theyre going to get caught with their breeches down.

Is there any proof of this ,pics? anything , whats the big deal ? As far as I know and CAN find evidence of ,some the states of the usa still kill people will the death sentance dont they , ? sounds quite sharia already...

Pax, your fears are not founded upon the agenda.....
Whats happenng s predcted by Pike, the next war s between christians and muslms.....they wll fight till a standstill and then they plan the NWO, one world religion takeover.....planned a hundred and more years ago.....

reply to post by stirling


your forgetting the billions of non christian , non muslims inhabitants of the earth,they may have something to say or do about it , or they may just let it happen i suppose

This thread title is one of the most absurd I've seen on here in a while. Please explain how crucifixions in Egypt are going to lead to Sharia law in the United States. Then explain who the hell you think is going to enforce said law system. Then explain how the hell you expect American citizens to even begin following it. The questionable reliability of your source not withstanding, the connection you've made here is rife with unrealistic paranoia.

Originally posted by stirling
Pax, your fears are not founded upon the agenda.....
Whats happenng s predcted by Pike, the next war s between christians and muslms.....they wll fight till a standstill and then they plan the NWO, one world religion takeover.....planned a hundred and more years ago.....

Got a link for that?

Originally posted by paxnatus
reply to post by syrinx high priest

 

Yes, in Egypt. Please do not think this is about Obama supporting Muslims. This is about Obama supporting
the Muslim Brotherhood and their leader Mohamed Morsi whom is now in power in Egypt.

how is he supporting him ? financially ? militarily ?

Originally posted by Nomadmonkey
It is scary, i am really scared. I just hope that god can put some good Republicans into position to turn this country around.

edit on 17-8-2012 by Nomadmonkey because: (no reason given)

Maybe God will strike down all Republicans and Democrats so the US can have intelligent and peaceful and honest leadership for a change. Then we can do business with other nations including Egypt with untainted hands and true brotherly concern.

If this story is true, we definitely have something to be concerned about. In my opinion we have supported waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too many dictatorships who abuse their citizens. We cannot and should not do it again.

Originally posted by paxnatus
Just because you do not like the source does not imply the article to be false.
The burden of proof is in your court friend.

Ummm...no...it isn't.

For several thousand years now mankind's great thinkers have all more or less agreed in the adage "One cannot prove a negative". This is precisely why in mathematics, algorithmic science, and logic there is no such thing as "false" when testing a hypothesis. Instead, the two hypotheses are identified as the Null Hypothesis (H0) and the Alternative Hypothesis (H1, H2, H3,...etc.).

For example, the only way I could "prove" that there is NOT any life whatsoever on the planet Mars would be to take a complete and total survey of every cubic centimeter of it's atmosphere and soil (even down to the core of the planet itself) to look for microorganisms. Preferably multiple times in order to account for things like experimental error or equipment failure. Thus, we can see that proving a negative while perhaps technically possible is usually so impractical that it requires nearly an omniscient understanding of the subject matter. Therefore, proper scientific and logical design of an experiment on Mars would set the Null Hypothesis (H0) to "No life has been detected on the planet Mars and the Alternative Hypothesis (H1) to "We have detected life on the planet Mars".

Hence, the "burden of proof" is pretty much always on the one attempting to prove the "positive" or (more accurately) the Alternative Hypothesis, albeit it with a few rare exceptions in theoretical physics and extremely arcane mathematics.

More importantly...please don't assert that I don't "like" the source from which the alleged crucifixions originated". I have no feelings of "like" or "dislike" at all towards them.

Rather, I was simply answering your question as one would a deep and sound understanding and educational background in the history of the Middle East and the myriad of crises currently unfolding...just like you requested. The first thing any historian or geo-political expert does when reading a primary historical document, such as a piece of journalism about current events ("History" means "in the past"...not necessarily "a really long time ago". Yesterday is still very much "history") is to ask yourself some basic "Who, where, what, why, how, and to what end" sorts of questions in an attempt to recognize bias and account for it appropriately.

For a historian "bias" isn't something to be avoided...it's something to be acknowledged as it is an inescapable part of the human condition. We all are somewhat biased, albeit some of us more so than others.

A prime example of how bias skews perception and the actual events of history can be found with our perceptions of the "Viking" peoples even to this day. The word "Viking" conjures images of a warlike, primitive, and savage barbarian and the phrase "rape, pillage, and plunder" is virtually synonmous w/ our modern depiction of them. However, all archeological evidence seems to indicate that these terrible Vikings weren't really such bad people assuming you take into account the time period they were part of. They were expert craftsman and artisans, treated their women better than pretty much the rest of Europe, and never enslaved or tortured people for amusement. Likewise, when the Norse went to colonize the Normandy region of France, they placed a great deal of importance upon the Norse assimilating the customs, religion, and language of the Frenchman as they recognized that even though they conquered the French militarily this did not give them the right to culturally eradicate or enslave an entire people. That's pretty respectable stuff for the living hell that was Medieval Europe.

So how did this myth of the "savage" Viking come to us? Easy. When the Vikings raided the modern day U.K. they had an exceptional penchant for pillaging monastaries and church's given that they always had lots of food, wine, ale, and money whereas any and all previous attackers in the land would summarily leave such establishments alone given their holy status. The difference? The Vikings were Pagans and had no more qualms about pillaging the Christians than the Christians did about pillaging the Muslim or Aztec religious sites.

Now take into account that the only literate class of people besides the nobility WAS THE RELIGIOUS ARISTOCRACY. Thus...all of our written accounts of Viking raids come to us from the very monks and priests who simply couldn't believe that these "godless barbarians" were actually attacking a bunch of monks. That's bias in action.
Thus, anybody who understands the Middle East would not necessarily accept at face value a story like this from an organization that supports, advocates, and recommends genocide until it can be corroborated with a second primary source that doesn't have an economic interest in spreading falsehoods. Makes sense?