AUDIT WEAPONS OF MASS DECEPTION



ORDO AB CHAO
A Latin expression, meaning Order out of Chaos. A motto of the Thirty-third Degree, and having the same allusion as lug e tenebris, which see in this work. The invention of this motto is to be attributed to the Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish petite at Charleston, and it is first met with in the Patent of Count de Grasse, dated February 1, 1802. When De Grasse afterward carried the polite over to France and established a Supreme Council there, he changed the motto, and, according to Lenning, Ordo ab hoc, Order out of This, was used by him and his Council in all their documents. If so, it was simply a blunder. - Source: Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry 
The manuscripts are a veritable gold-mine of Masonic information, for they constitute, as far as we are aware, the most complete set of early Scottish Rite rituals in the United States. Each of the five books was copied from rituals belonging to Giles F. Yates, Thirty-third Degree, a member of both the Northern and Southern Supreme Councils, who had most, if not all, of the manuscript rituals of Mr. Frederick Dalcho, one of the founders of the first Supreme Council.


What is ? 
  1. Deception 
  2. Beguilement 
  3. Deceit 
  4. Bluff 
  5. Mystification and 
  6. Subterfuge  

Are acts to propagate beliefs that are not true, or not the whole truth (as in half-truths or omission). Deception can involve : 
  1. dissimulation 
  2. propaganda, and 
  3. sleight of hand, as well as 
  4. distraction, 
  5. camouflage, or 
  6. concealment. 
There is also self-deception, as in bad faith. 

 Deception 
Is a major relational transgression that often leads to feelings of betrayal and distrust between relational partners. Deception violates relational rules and is considered to be a negative violation of expectations. Most people expect friends, relational partners, and even strangers to be truthful most of the time. If people expected most conversations to be untruthful, talking and communicating with others would require distraction and misdirection to acquire reliable information. A significant amount of deception occurs betweenromantic and relational partners.

Types
Deception includes several types of communications or omissions that serve to distort or omit the complete truth. Deception itself is intentionally managing verbal and/or nonverbal messages so that the message receiver will believe in a way that the message sender knows is false. Intent is critical with regard to deception. Intent differentiates between deception and an honest mistake. TheInterpersonal Deception Theory explores the interrelation between communicative context and sender and receiver cognitions and behaviors in deceptive exchanges. 
The five primary forms of deception are:
  1. Lies: making up information or giving information that is the opposite or very different from the truth.
  2. Equivocations: making an indirect, ambiguous, or contradictory statement.
  3. Concealments: omitting information that is important or relevant to the given context, or engaging in behavior that helps hide relevant information.
  4. Exaggerations: overstatement or stretching the truth to a degree.
  5. Understatements: minimization or downplaying aspects of the truth.

Motives
There are three primary motivations for deceptions in close relationships.
  1. Partner-focused motives: using deception to avoid hurting the partner, to help the partner to enhance or maintain his/her self-esteem, to avoid worrying the partner, and to protect the partner's relationship with a third party. Partner-motivated deception can sometimes be viewed as socially polite and relationally beneficial.
  2. Self-focused motives: using deception to enhance or protect their self-image, wanting to shield themselves from anger,embarrassment, or criticism. Self-focused deception is generally perceived as a more serious transgression than partner-focused deception because the deceiver is acting for selfish reasons rather than for the good of the relationship.
  3. Relationship-focused motives: using deception to limit relationship harm by avoiding conflict or relational trauma. Relationally motivated deception can be beneficial to a relationship, and other times it can be harmful by further complicating matters.

Detection
Deception detection between relational partners is extremely difficult, unless a partner tells a blatant or obvious lie or contradicts something the other partner knows to be true. While it is difficult to deceive a partner over a long period of time, deception often occurs in day-to-day conversations between relational partners. Detecting deception is difficult because there are no known completely reliable indicators of deception. Deception, however, places a significant cognitive load on the deceiver. He or she must recall previous statements so that his or her story remains consistent and believable. As a result, deceivers often leak important information both verbally and nonverbally. 
Deception and its detection is a complex, fluid, and cognitive process that is based on the context of the message exchange. The Interpersonal Deception Theory posits that interpersonal deception is a dynamic, iterative process of mutual influence between a sender, who manipulates information to depart from the truth, and a receiver, who attempts to establish the validity of the message. A deceiver's actions are interrelated to the message receiver's actions. It is during this exchange that the deceiver will reveal verbal and nonverbal information about deceit. Some research has found that there are some cues that may be correlated with deceptive communication, but scholars frequently disagree about the effectiveness of many of these cues to serve as reliable indicators. Noted deception scholar Aldert Vrij even states that there is no nonverbal behavior that is uniquely associated with deception. 

As previously stated, a specific behavioral indicator of deception does not exist. There are, however, some nonverbal behaviors that have been found to be correlated with deception. Vrij found that examining a "cluster" of these cues was a significantly more reliable indicator of deception than examining a single cue. 
Camouflage
This wallaby has adaptive colouration which allows it to blend with its environment

The camouflage of a physical object often works by breaking up the visual boundary of that object. This usually involves colouring the camouflaged object with the same colours as the background against which the object will be hidden. In the realm of deceptive half-truths camouflage is realized by 'hiding' some of the truths.
Example:
Camouflage as a form of visual deception is an essential part of military deception. 
Disguise

A disguise is an appearance to create the impression of being somebody or something else; for a well-known person this is also called incognito. Passing involves more than mere dress and can include hiding one's real manner of speech.
Example:
The fictional Sherlock Holmes often disguised himself as somebody else to avoid being recognized.

In a more abstract sense, 'disguise' may refer to the act of disguising the nature of a particular proposal in order to hide an unpopular motivation or effect associated with that proposal. This is a form of political spin or propaganda 
See also: rationalisation and transfer within the techniques of propaganda generation. 
Example:
Depicting an act of war as a "peace" mission. 

Dazzle
Example:
The defensive mechanisms of most octopuses to eject black ink in a large cloud to aid in escape from predators. 
Simulation
Simulation consists of exhibiting false information. There are three simulation techniques:  
  1. mimicry (copying another model), 
  2. fabrication (making up a new model), and 
  3. distraction (offering an alternative model) 
Mimicry
In the biological world, mimicry involves unconscious deception by similarity to another organism, or to a natural object. Animals for example may deceive predators or prey by visual, auditory or other means.

Fabrication
To make something that in reality is not what it appears to be. For example, in World War II, it was common for the Allies to use hollow tanks made out of cardboard to fool German reconnaissance planes into thinking a large armor unit was on the move in one area while the real tanks were well hidden and on the move in a location far from the fabricated "dummy" tanks.

Distraction
To get someone's attention from the truth by offering bait or something else more tempting to divert attention away from the object being concealed. For example, a security company publicly announces that it will ship a large gold shipment down one route, while in reality take a different route.

In social research
Some methodologies in social research, especially in psychology involve deception. The researchers purposely mislead or misinform the participants about the true nature of the experiment.
In an experiment conducted by Stanley Milgram in 1963 the researchers told participants that they would be participating in a scientific study of memory and learning. In reality the study looked at the participants' willingness to obey commands, even when that involved inflicting pain upon another person. After the study, the subjects were informed of the true nature of the study, and steps were taken in order to ensure that the subjects left in a state of well being. 
Use of deception raises many problems of research ethics and it is strictly regulated by professional bodies such as the American Psychological Association.

In psychological research
Psychological research often needs to deceive the subjects as to its actual purpose. The rationale for such deception is that humans are sensitive to how they appear to others (and to themselves) and this self-consciousness might interfere with or distort from how they actually behave outside of a research context (where they would not feel they were being scrutinized). For example, if a psychologist is interested in learning the conditions under which students cheat on tests, directly asking them, "how often do you cheat?," might result in a high percent of "socially desirable" answers and the researcher would in any case be unable to verify the accuracy of these responses. In general, then, when it is unfeasible or naive to simply ask people directly why or how often they do what they do, researchers turn to the use of deception to distract their participants from the true behavior of interest. So, for example, in a study of cheating, the participants may be told that the study has to do with how intuitive they are. During the process they might be given the opportunity to look at (secretly, they think) another participant's [presumably highly intuitively correct] answers before handing in their own. At the conclusion of this or any research involving deception, all participants must be told of the true nature of the study and why deception was necessary (this is called debriefing). Moreover, it is customary to offer to provide a summary of the results to all participants at the conclusion of the research.
Though commonly used and allowed by the ethical guidelines of the American Psychological Association, there has been debate about whether or not the use of deception should be permitted in psychological research experiments.
Those against deception object to the ethical and methodological issues involved in its use. Dresser (1981) notes that, ethically, researchers are only to use subjects in an experiment after the subject has given informed consent. However, because of its very nature, a researcher conducting a deception experiment cannot reveal its true purpose to the subject, thereby making any consent given by a subject misinformed (p. 3). Baumrind (1964), criticizing the use of deception in the Milgram (1963) obedience experiment, argues that deception experiments inappropriately take advantage of the implicit trust and obedience given by the subject when the subject volunteers to participate (p. 421).

From a practical perspective, there are also methodological objections to deception. Ortmann and Hertwig (1998) note that "deception can strongly affect the reputation of individual labs and the profession, thus contaminating the participant pool" (p. 806). If the subjects in the experiment are suspicious of the researcher, they are unlikely to behave as they normally would, and the researcher's control of the experiment is then compromised (p. 807).

Those who do not object to the use of deception note that there is always a constant struggle in balancing "the need for conducting research that may solve social problems and the necessity for preserving the dignity and rights of the research participant" (Christensen, 1988, p. 670).

They also note that, in some cases, using deception is the only way to obtain certain kinds of information, and that prohibiting all deception in research would "have the egregious consequence of preventing researchers from carrying out a wide range of important studies" (Kimmel, 1998, p. 805).

Additionally, findings suggest that deception is not harmful to subjects. Christensen's (1988) review of the literature found "that research participants do not perceive that they are harmed and do not seem to mind being misled" (p. 668). Furthermore, those participating in experiments involving deception "reported having enjoyed the experience more and perceived more educational benefit" than those who participated in non-deceptive experiments (p. 668).

Lastly, it has also been suggested that an unpleasant treatment used in a deception study or the unpleasant implications of the outcome of a deception study may be the underlying reason that a study using deception is perceived as unethical in nature, rather than the actual deception itself (Broder, 1998, p. 806; Christensen, 1988, p. 671).
In philosophy
Deception is a recurring theme in modern philosophy. In 1641 Descartes published his meditations, in which he introduced the notion of the Deus deceptor, a posited being capable of deceiving the thinking ego about reality. The notion was used as part of his hyperbolic doubt, wherein one decides to doubt everything there is to doubt. The Deus deceptor is a mainstay of so-called skeptical arguments, which purport to put into question our knowledge of reality. The punch of the argument is that all we know might be wrong, since we might be deceived. Stanley Cavell has argued that all skepticism has its root in this fear of deception.

 Weapons of Mass Deception 
Is pejorative expression used by some people to describe U.S. President George W. Bush's claim that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction as justification for the war on Iraq.
The variation Weapons of Mass Distraction has also been used by pundits and satirists. This punning alteration accuses the Bush administration of using the war in Iraq to draw the nation's attention away from other problems, such as the economic recession of 2002. The meaning was later inverted to describe Bush's alleged attempts to divert attention away from the war following a drop in public support for the war. 

Book
Weapons of Mass Deception was used as the title of a nonfiction book by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber. This book focused specifically on the PR tactics and techniques of the Bush administration after the September 11th terrorist attacks. 
Music 
Weapons of Mass Deception is the fourth studio album of British indie band Dissident Prophet. All tracks produced by Tom Livemore and Andy Jennings. It was independently released in the UK, on their own TAX Records label, on 20 November 2012. 
Other media 
Weapons of Mass Deception was also used as the title of a documentary produced by Danny Schechter which originally aired on HBO. 
Also, a popular NPR commentator Connie Rice read her Top Ten Weapons of Mass Distraction on The Tavis Smiley Show, July 14, 2004.

07/25/11
Free From Lies: How to Avoid Deception
Most of us are suffering the consequences of believing lies. Those consequences include broken relationships, fear, depression, self-loathing, and guilt, to name a few.
The results of believing a lie can be as numerous as the kinds of lies one can believe. But if there is a single word that sums up the results of believing any lie, it would be bondage. 
Enslaved by Lies
Are there any areas of bondage in your life? You’re in bondage if you can’t seem to break free from harmful emotions or sinful patterns in your life. 
  • Jesus said, “Everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin” (John 8:34, ESV). 
  • You’re in bondage if there is some consuming area of your life that you can’t stop thinking about—like food, a guy, or your appearance. 
  • “For whatever overcomes a person, to that he is enslaved” (2 Peter 2:19).
Maybe you’re in bondage to your past, and you don’t feel free to be used by God. Maybe you are in bondage to your body image and are not free to enjoy food in the way God intended. Maybe you’re in bondage to spending hour upon hour engrossed in the Internet or text messaging and are not free to be in solitude. Maybe you’re in bondage to a performance-based faith and are not free to enjoy God, period. Maybe you are in bondage to worry, fear, anger, depression, or self-pity.
We want you to know that you are not alone. Many other women have been there. We’ve been there ourselves. However, we, along with countless others, have learned how to find freedom from the lies Satan throws our way. 

The Way of Freedom
True freedom is found in a vital, growing relationship with Jesus Christ. Jesus (the living Word of God) has revealed Himself in Scripture (the written Word of God). If we want to know Him, we must devote ourselves to reading, study, and meditation on the written Word. There is no substitute and there are no shortcuts. The Enemy is constantly confronting us with his us with his lies. In order his deception, our minds and hearts must be filled with the Lord Jesus and saturated with His Word.
But it’s not enough just to know the Truth. We must also surrender to it. That means we must be willing to change our thinking and our life-style in any area that is inconsistent with the Truth as it is revealed in the Word of God.
Millions of teens who claim to be Christians and are active in their youth groups are nonetheless deceived; they are walking in ways that are not biblical. Their values, their responses, their relationships, their choices, and their priorities reveal that they have bought into the lies of the Enemy and have embraced the world’s way of thinking.
Living according to the Truth requires a conscious choice to reject deception and to embrace the Truth. That is why one psalmist prayed, “Keep me from deceitful ways. . . . I have chosen the way of truth” (Psalm 119:29-30, NIV).

The Choice to Live Free
Would you ask God to deliver you and keep you from any lies that may have lodged in your mind and heart? And would you purpose in your heart to choose “the way of truth”? That will not always be easy—at times it will be really hard, in fact. But the way of Truth is the way of blessing and joy.
Our hearts plead with God to rescue you from the lies of this world.
We want you to embrace life— His life in you—to the fullest!
We want you enjoy the freedom He came to give you.
We want your life to fulfill every purpose for which He created you.
And we want to see God use your life to help others in your generation—and the next—experience the great freedom and joy of walking in the Truth! 

Making it personal
  • Can you identify any lies that have taken hold in your heart and mind? 
  • How have they influenced your values, relationships, and behaviors? 
  • Ask God to deliver you from those lies and then purpose to walk in Truth.
How to Avoid Spiritual Deception
The following suggestions are mentioned in order to help you think clearly, carefully, and biblically.

  • Prayerfully submit yourself to the Lord Jesus Christ
  • Repent from any known sin and ask the God of truth to reveal His truth to you.
  • Read the Bible regularly for your own personal edification.
  • Seek out and attend a balanced Bible teaching church that honors God's Word, teaches through the Scriptures on a regular basis, and avoids excesses and extremes.
  • Define words, always, by definition and in context.
  • Use a well recognized International Standard Bible Dictionary when defining Biblical terminolgy.
  • Use a basic standard Dictionary regularly in order to define words, terms and phrases properly.  (A full sized unabridged dictionary is preferrable in order to get a complete overview of all recognized definitions.)
  • Know personally The Five Basic Doctrines of the historic Christian faith.
  • Know the Basics of Bible Discernment and stand firm in your faith.
  • Understand clearly Who and What Jesus Christ  claimed to be and really is.
  • Understand Eight Basic Rules of Interpretation (used for 2500 years).
  • Understand the definition of words such as "Religion", "Cult", "Aberrant", "Heresy", etc.
  • Understand what a "counterfeit" is:
                   Merriam-Webster Online: Definition of Counterfeit
                   Wikipedia: Definition of Counterfeit
                   Encyclopedia Britannica: Definition of Counterfeiting
  • Educate yourself about the fact that false teachers and cults are real and dangerous.
  • Personally educate your spouse, fiance', children, etc. about these things.
  • Learn what Biblical Hermeneutics is and how to properly interpret the Bible.
  • Examine closely what is being said to you when people approach you and want to discuss with you their brand of religion, miracles, experiences, revelations, etc.
  • Test all things by the Word of God (1 Thessalonians 5:21-22).
  • Read the Bible regularly, slowly, and carefully.

 Taqiyya ("al Taqiyya")
Is the Muslims' license to lie to infidels in order to camouflage Islam's holy war strategy (jihad) to conquer the world. The strategy mentioned 
through orders and solicitations in the Quran 3:28 and other Islamic writings and reference applies to all Western countries and against all infidels people (non-muslims) who is not
Islamic and therefore seen as a constant threat to Islam. 
Quran 3:28 or Quran 3:28 are two different translations of the Quran verse and says exactly the same in summary:
"Let not the believers (muslims) take the unbelievers for friends, or their companions instead for the believers (muslims): if someone does, then you have no contact with Allah [They does not represent islam anymore and can be killed ]: unless muslims take precautions, and plays fake (Guard yourselves from them) [Which means that muslims say that they are unbelievers (non-muslim's) best friends when in fact they hate them ].


One of the so-called largest Islamic commentators and historians of all "Ibn Kathir"commented the above sura (chapter) 3 and verse 28 of the Quran and said that "muslims are allowed to show friendship outwardly, but never inwardly)." . Another renowned scholar among muslims, "Al-Bukhari" commented by saying that "We[muslims] smile in the face of some people[non-muslims] although our hearts curse them".


You can check it yourself in the tafsir explanation of the Quran among others at about line or paragraph number 8 here: | HERE or here: HERE 
The Quran that Muhammad dictated clearly states in many places that Allah is the greatest cheater, scamer, illusionist and liar among them all. From The Quran 8:17, we get  confirmed that Allah  is all muslims since Islam and the Quran requires that all muslims in reality are obliged to emulate Muhammad since he created Allah and because 90% of the Quran is about Muhammad and only 10% of Allah. It is therefore easy to understand why muslims cultivates what's in the Koran. Muhammad = Allah = muslims. Which gives us the explanation of why all muslims support the lies, deception, illusion, terror, murder of people, threats, slavery and oppression to take over the world and exterminate all other belief systems. 1400 years of Islamic barbaric war history shows the same.

There are many other verses that encourages and legitimizes deception and lies here: | HERE

Western countries are seen as war areas (Dar al-Harb) and considered it until Islam has taken over the state or region by means of lies, deception, illusion, sedition, riots, infiltration, damage to weaken the economy, murders, mutilation, oppression, rape, humiliating etc. This age-old political and ideological fascism work very divisive (divide and rule) and the demobilization of the western society when Muslims attack on all fronts in our everyday lifes
In short, they are all ideological methods and tricks permitted to use and they are increasing in pace and strength with increasing power and demography in the countries they infiltrate and eventually take over and govern with the help of fascism, screeds (genocide), oppression and slavery etc.  
Never forget the magic word "Taqiyya" because it is essentially important to understand why misinformed, disillusioned and insecure classes of the western world are deceived and deceive time and again throughout history. You should read the entire text, and then watch the videos and other documents of the Internet pages that are posted below.  
A idiologi that Islam contains tools that relgion, jihad (holy war), politics, high birth rates, manipulation, infiltration, planting of conflicting information, as needed, history falsification, denial of self religion, political correctness, self-pity, propaganda, charm offensive's in addition to lying and deception as a main instrument. This was all about, and includes continued extensive use of lies and deception. In older times as today, islam and muslims take new instrument in use to achieve that other nations, cultures and people submit to Islam, both in technology, research, education and politics etc.  
The goal is today the same as it was when islam was born, that the infidels, Christians, Jews, atheists, Hindus, Buddhist  etc shall be subject to Islam through infiltration, conversion, murder, lying, confusion, dupes and deception to destroy other countries' culture, history and achieve Islamization worldwide.


More you should know about Taqiyya:
Taqiyya comes from the Quran in Islam and the word derives from the verb "Ittaqu" which means "protection" in that they deceive, manipulate and fool the enemies or threats against Islam by lying, simulations, deception, manipulation and illusions etc. to protect and promote Islam by preventing Islam's dirty tricks and intentions to be revealed. This takes place depending on the needs, means or situvasjon one is in to win the war against the enemy on all possible fronts. Since western countries are considered as war zones(Dar al-Harb) and unbelievers is regarded as enemies of Islam then all Western countries and their infidel inhabitants is considered as a constant threat to Islam. This provides license to constant execution of Taqiyya from Muslims in Western countries. 
Taqiyya is performed not only as pure lies, deception and false illusion. In the beginning when muslims are few and weak in an state or area it is performed most often as a passive silence from muslims. Passive silence that we can compare with the western proverb. "He who is silent consents" and have great influence when muslims frontline soldiers encourages terrorism, like blowing up themselves and others with boms, while billions of other muslims do not contradict, denounce and demonstrate against this. 

To understand the background of al Taqiyya must fortå this:
Al-taqiyya and dissimulation are words used for a practice of Muslims blatantly lying to non-Muslims. All but some of the most fundamental Muslims consider the act of Al-taqiyya or lying to non-Muslims to be a good work. This is very important when one remembers that, in Islam, salvation is determined by good works. This means that a Muslim lying to a non-Muslim is that Muslim doing a good work to earn salvation. It is almost equivalent to a Christian accepting Jesus as his savior. One of the big differences is that a Christian only needs to accept Jesus as his savior once to become saved forever but a Muslim must do his good works consistently and repeatedly to earn his salvation with the except of the greatest work of dying while fighting non-Muslims.  
This is particularly important when one realizes that the only work which can guarantee salvation for a Muslim is to wage war against and kill non-Muslims or at least support those who do wage war against and kill non-Muslims. It is only logical that to lie in support of a war against non-Muslims could guarantee salvation for a Muslim because it would be considered supporting the war. This is a very powerful motivation for any Muslim to lie to any non-Muslim for any reason but especially when concerning any war or military effort against non-Muslims.


They were "legitimate" mujahedeen, whose mission was to undermine the enemy's resistance and level of mobilization. One of their major objectives was to cause a split among the enemy's camp while downplaying the issues related to Islam ("Oh, I am not religious." "Oh, that is not Islam, you are mistaken, there is so much misinformation." "Oh, it is in the interpretation." "Brother, Islam is all about peace and love and music just like in the 60s.") In many instances, they convinced their targeted audiences that Jihad is not aimed at them, that indigenous people are not targeted. Meanwhile the (allegedly) "un Islamic" Muslims continued their attacks on the target's property and life (e.g. Lashkar-e Toyiba, Mujahideen and Osama Bin Laden's
declaration of war against innocent American civilians). 
They convinced many Jews that they will be protected from Christians, and they convinced many Christians that Jews were the mortal enemies, because they killed Issa (Jesus). They convinced the Aramaics, Copts, and Hebrews that the enemy is Greece, and signed peace agreements with the Bysantines Greeks at the expense of Maronite Aramaics, etc. 
They convinced the knitted diversity of India to degrade into civil war by introduction of a variant Buddhist / mystical Islam (Sufism which is decried as "deviant Islam" used to ease the transition of new recruits from local communities) creating divisions (based on Muslim - Non Muslim) eventually fomenting unrest and chaos in the land to prepare it for waves of armed Invasion (Mohammad bin Qasim, Mahmud Ghaznavi, etc.).



As late as in 2003 one muslim,"Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi" from Irag used taqiyya or lies to deceive naive and mentally retarded leaders and politician in USA to go to war against Iraq to remove Sadam Hussain which was not recognized as a true muslim frontline soldier for islam's final goal to subjugate and suppress all other belief system's fascistic under islam. Even Sadam Hussain was a harsh dictator  and ruler over his Country, he actually made it safer for many Christians. Under Saddam there were 1,000,000 Iraqi Christians. After seven years the number is down to 250,000. After the war many under the so-called new democratic regime supportet by naive and western retarded politician, many Christians have been killed by muslims and many are suppressed, prosecuted or have been forced to fleeing. Read more here and here about the Christians and read more her about the lying muslim.
HERE | HERE


In 1999 the Kosovo Albanian muslims fooled NATO and the allied forces (the West) into believing that some of their muslims war brother's were massacred civilians located in Racak in Serbia and that the Christians Kosovo Serbs were the perpetrators. This triggered later that NATO forces attacked and bombed the Christian Serbs. When the Christian Serbs had to flee their homes and villages during the bombing, muslims could freely and unhindered get access to Serbian Christian churches, ruin them and burn them down during the observation of the UN - forces.
  
Some years later it was revealed facts that showed that the Racak massacre was false and it was made up by Kosovo Albanian muslims to gain sympathy for their own war in the West. The Serbs who once consisted of only Christians had even before the war, experienced high muslim birth rates, rioting and,incitement to rioting  from the muslims for many years before the war started. You can find more information and documentary videos about this here: 
The Truth About Kosovo & Serbian People/ Albanian: HERE#


Most also know the Hebron Massacre from1929
The Hebron Massacre of 1929: | HERE
Hebron Massacre, the first documented massacre in the Holyland: | HERE
Notice how muslims worked to create incitement to riot or war Out of nothing:
Quote:
"Arabs spread false rumors throughout their communities, saying that Jews were carrying out "wholesale killings of Arabs".
"or said in another way: " Muslismske Arabs spread false rumors throughout the community that Jews had carried out massacres on arbabere." 
They convinced the knitted diversity of India to degrade into civil war by introduction of a variant Buddhist / mystical Islam (Sufism which is decried as "deviant Islam" used to ease the transition of new recruits from local communities) creating divisions (based on Muslim - Non Muslim) eventually fomenting unrest and chaos in the land to prepare it for waves of armed Invasion (Mohammad bin Qasim, Mahmud Ghaznavi, etc.). 
Even today, India is bitterly divided and getting slowly Islamised as battle lines form between hordes of overzealous Muslims (armed and trained in madrasahs) and the more pacifist civilians of urban dwellings. 
This Jihadic agency of subversion was one of the most fascinating and efficient arms of the conquest. In less than four decades, the Middle East fell to the Arab-Islamic rule [since Arab society was divided again between pagan and Muslim resulting in nephews and sons killing their uncles and fathers in cold blood] followed by North Africa and Central Asia [this was the era of hordes like tribal conquests where barbaric savages invaded pacifist civilians in towns of major civilizations; the same scenario replayed itself against the Arab-Islamic world with the Invasion of the Mongolian hordes]. 
Al-Taqiyah was a formidable weapon, used by the first dynasties and strategists. Today, scholars may identify it as deception. But the Jihadic deception was and still is more powerful than the James Bondian methods of Western classical intelligence tactics, for the simple reason that it has a civilizational, global dimension versus the narrow State interest of the regular Western subversive 
Methods.
Al-Taqiyah is still in use today (and is widely practised and acknowledged by the Shi'ite sect) but not necessarily State-organized. Arab-Islamic missionaries are slowly converting the disillusioned criminal classes of the Western world by feeding them a Western "moderate" version of Islam (at the same time denouncing the actions of Muslims in the rest of the world as Un Islamic e.g. Taliban, GIA & FIA [Armed Islamic Front] of Algeria, Hamas, Lashkar -e Toyiba, Bin Laden and company, etc.) 
It is done to prevent the new converts from seeing the real face of Islam; at least until their faith or mental conditioning is strong enough to make them turn against their own country and people. 
A good example is the growing influence of Islamists in the Americas. On the one hand, American embassies, trade facilities, soldiers and intelligence infrastructures are under attack (but denounced as un-Islamic for the benefit of the new American converts). 
On the other hand, the multiplying Islamic community (due to illegal immigration, paper marriages, religious visas granted to the religious men) attempts to pass itself off as "peace loving" and patriotic. In their own circles, the same community will liberally and violently denounce America, the West and its values (freedom, individualism, secularism, capitalism, scientific materialism, benign rehabilitation of criminals, prevention of cruelty against animals, women and gay rights). 
One can easily detect Taqiyah in the two discourses used by Islamist strategists. On the one hand, one comprehensive Islamist theory is attempting to mobilize the Middle East, and sometimes Western Christian leaders and intellectuals, against "evil Jews". 
They are forming alliances with everyone from Animal Rights' groups (to attack the Jewish tradition of slaughter which is ironically similar in cruelty to the Islamic way) to Far Right fundamentalists (to push for censorship of critiques of Islam and attack every forward thinking movement like women's rights and gay rights). 
We see considerable success on that level. And on the other hand, another Islamist comprehensive theory is attempting - with success also - to mobilize the Jews against "evil and pagan Christians". 
One can easily detect the sophisticated work of Taqiyah, for the strategic objective of Islamists is to destroy the foundations of the non Muslim civilizations, as a prelude to the defeat of an isolated Israel, India, United States of America, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Russia, Egypt, Afghanistan, etc. 
Taqiyah is not a unique phenomenon in history. Many strategists from all backgrounds implemented subversion. But the uniqueness of today's Taqiyah is its success within advanced and sophisticated societies. Taqiyah is winning massively because of the immense lack of knowledge among Western elites, both Jewish and Christian. 
For interesting examples of Taqiyah methods, visit Christian discussion groups and forums and note the discourse of Islamist visitors aimed at undermining the Christian perception of Jews, and visit Jewish discussion groups and forums and note the subtle anti-Christian discourse of Islamist visitors. It is really informative and fascinating.


More documentary and instructional materials here:
Videos:
  • Taqiyya - Islamisk Bedrag: | HERE
  • Islam - Al Taqiyya (the art of deception) | HERE
  • Lyver Muslimer?: | HERE
  • Al Taqiyya: | HERE
  • Muslimer manipulerer med Vestens medier:  | HERE
  • Muhamad Al-Dura was not killed. | HERE
  • Pallywood: | HERE
  • Pallywood: Gaza Beach "Massacre": HERE
  • More Lies From Pallywood In Under a Minute: HERE

Document and text pages:
What does the Religion of Peace Teach About Lying (Taqiyya and Kitman): | HEREIslam Permits Lying to Deceive Unbelievers and Bring World Domination! | HERE
Al Taqiyya: The Islamist Terrorist Weapon of Deception: | HERE | Norsk oversettelseAl-taqiyya: | HERE | Norsk oversettelseTaqiyya/Kitman: | HEREAl-Taqiyya is Alive and Well in Geneva: | HERE
Al Taqiyya: The Islamist Terrorist Weapon Of Deception: | HERETaqiyya and kitman: The role of Deception in Islamic terrorism(4) | HERE
Defeat The Third Jihad | HEREIslamic Concept of al-Taqiyya: | HERE | Norsk oversettelse | HERE | HERE | HERE | HERE
----------------------------


Would a Muslim lie about his faith to further his cause , then reveal his true ties when the time is right ? YES


Lying is Permitted to Further the Cause of Islam
Main Article: Lying 
Islam is the only world religion which allows, encourages, and even demands[1] lying by its followers. Lying for Islam is generally referred to as Taqiyya (تقي). Many Muslims will claim that this is not an Islamic, but a Shi'ite practice. Unfortunately, this is a lie. There are many verses in the Qur'an which condone lying and deception, and several classical and contemporary Sunni scholars have validated its place within main-stream Islam.[2] In the inquisition miḥna during the Caliphate of al-Ma’mun, a number of Sunni scholars used taqiyya, attesting to the Qur’an as having been created despite believing the opposite.[3] Given these facts, some will go on to attack the strict definition of Taqiyya and claim that it is “only allowed to save one's own life” or that its "restricted to its use in war". Again, these statements are false. In sahih (authentic) hadith, Muhammad admits to being a liar and advises its acceptable for Muslims to do likewise,[4] allowing his followers to use deception to silence critics.[5] One of the 99 "holy names"[6] of the Islamic deity is Al-Makir (the Deceiver),[7] and in the Qur'an Allah refers to himself as the 'best deceiver', and admits to deceiving Muslims[8] and creating Christianity through deception.[9] With all things considered, the simple fact is Islamic teachings as a whole breed dishonesty like no other religion and even elevates it to a holy status.

Tactics Used by Muslim Spokespersons and Debaters
Main Article: Deception of Non-Muslims
Muslim spokespersons employ a peculiar style of deceptive propaganda that so far has caught western media off-guard. It takes advantage of a common assumption among those who have only been exposed to other religions – the assumption that the statements of religious leaders can be taken at face value because religious leaders want people to understand their religion. It takes advantage of western ignorance of Islam while at the same time seeking to maintain that ignorance. It takes advantage of people's tendency to see Islam as a religion in the traditional sense, rather than as a combination of a militant political ideology and a religion. Thus a Muslim religious leader should not be seen in the same way as most religious leaders. He should be viewed as a combination of politician and religious leader. When addressing a western, non-Muslim audience, he should not be viewed as a typical missionary, but as an astute politician addressing a hostile audience who won't like all of his policies - he will tell you what you want to hear. 
Muslims use a number of strategies to either conceal the more barbaric aspects of their religion or to deceive people about Islamic doctrine. The initial deception is semantic. Literally, they say one thing and mean another, the opposite of calling a spade a spade. This typically involves using a dual meaning that is generally only understood by Muslims, or using Arabic terms. The initial deception is followed up with a number of rhetorical techniques that create a barrier to effective communication. These are essentially a form of diversion. While some of these tricks are familiar to a western audience, some are largely unfamiliar and play on Islamic concepts with which the west is unfamiliar.  
Tactics used by Muslims
Muslims use a number of strategies to either conceal the more barbaric aspects of their religion or to deceive people about Islamic doctrine. The initial deception is semantic. Literally, they say one thing and mean another, the opposite of calling a spade a spade. This typically involves using a dual meaning that is generally only understood by Muslims, or using Arabic terms. The initial deception is followed up with a number of rhetorical techniques that create a barrier to effective communication. These are essentially a form of diversion. While some of these tricks are familiar to a western audience, some are largely unfamiliar and play on Islamic concepts with which the west is unfamiliar.
   Deception

Moshe Ben-Chaim
Reader: Dear Mesora,
Why does our Holy Torah contain so many instances of deception? After being a student of the Chumash for many years, I am left with a feeling of misunderstanding. Whenever I conclude a Parsha that illustrates deception performed by our Patriarchs, I cannot arrive at a positive explanation for its inclusion. I feel that all 
that these illuminations of deception do, is provide the Gentiles with more ammunition to criticize the Jewish people.
While driving from Florida to New York, I was listening to a sermon by a minister on the Parsha about Shechem, where Simeon and Levi deceived the men to undergo circumcision, then killed them in their helpless state out of revenge for their sister Dinah. “Look out for the tricky Jews!” he was preaching. “Even in their own Bible we see how deceitful the Jew is!” Are these the same ministers who proclaim to be supporting Israel? Aren’t ‘they’ the ones being deceptive?

Can you imagine how many listeners he was reaching through this radio broadcast? Can you imagine how much anti-Semitism he was spreading? How much more hate does he vocalize from behind the closed doors of his parish? We Jews must not be blind and naive to the claims of our neighbors, that they are not anti-Semitic. Our Holy Torah contains many examples of deceit, such as the serpent deceiving Eve into eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge. Abraham asked his wife Sarah to pretend she was his sister twice. Jacob put on animal skins, at his other Rebecca’s behest, to appear to be his brother Esav so as to obtain Isaac’s blessings. Jacob deceived Laban out of his flock. Rachael stole an idol from her father Laban. Laban tricked Jacob into marrying his daughter Leah. Joseph’s brothers tricked their father Jacob, to believe in Joseph’s death, by showing him Joseph’s blood stained coat. Joseph deceived his brothers in Egypt to make them believe he was the Viceroy of Pharaoh.
What really bothers me is the combined affect of all of the above. Have we been given the Chumash as a “Book of instruction” on how to con our fellow man?
Mesora: Your question is very important. At the core of Judaism, is our firm attachment and unmatched position held by “honesty”. Only with honesty can one learn: if we assume we know something when it is not yet clear to our minds, we deceive ourselves. But if we remain truthful, we can say we don’t know, when we don’t. This humility and honesty allows us to continue our search for answers until we do in fact arrive at one. This is why honesty is the cornerstone to Torah knowledge, and all knowledge. Without honesty, we cannot learn, and we fail at our objective: to know and love God through His Torah. Honesty is demanded in all areas, and certainly, when the very question posed is precisely about that topic.
However, we must distinguish between honesty in intellectual pursuits, and between the honesty we engage in society. The Torah does permit one to lie on rare occasions, such as saving his life. We only subject ourselves to death for the three sins of idolatry, adultery, and murder. In these cases we must suffer death, and not violate. But as for all other prohibitions, only if the intent of our oppressor’s ultimatum is our public denial of God’s commands, do we violate, instead of dying, as the Torah says, “Live by them” (the commands). The Rabbis clarify, “Live by them and do not die by them.” Thus, we are mandated not to sacrifice our lives when given an ultimatum to violate or die, except in the three mentioned. Therefore, lying is allowed to save one’s life. This answers why Abraham asked his wife to say she was his sister. Abraham knew if he said Sarah was his wife, the Egyptians would kill him to marry her. However, by lying and claiming she was his sister, their desire for Sarah would cause them to bribe Abraham with wealth and fame. This was Abraham’s plan: to obtain a public, respected status, whereby no one would harm him once they learned the truth. (Rabbi Bernard Fox) This case is an example where deceit is permitted for saving a life. But what of cases where a life is not at risk? Is lying permitted?
Regarding the snake that lied to Eve, we read that God punished it. Laban as well had no grounds for switching his promised daughter. So both cases are clearly violations of justice. Neither one was a Torah abiding character.
When the brother’s lied to their father about Joseph’s death, it was not a simple case of kidnapping. Together, they had discussed the matter of their young, seemingly egomaniacal brother, and concluded that he was delusional, and could harm matters of establishing the Twelve Tribes. They did not function out of simple animosity. (God would not create a nation from base individuals.) Their sale of Joseph was due to their judgment of a greater good. But in this case, they sinned. They judged him as an adult, when he had not yet been released from the clutches of his infantile emotions. (Rabbi Israel Chait) So the Torah exposes the flaws of deceit quite clearly, but not without informing us of the other good character traits of these Ten Tribes. We learn an important lesson: the Torah does not hide man’s flaws, and does not condone deceit of an improper kind, but exposes man’s sins so we may learn what is poor character, as well as what is proper character.
What of Joseph’s deceiving his brothers, as Egypt’s viceroy, feigning he did not know them, and fabricating his elaborate accusations, imprisoning Judah and forcing Jacob to relinquish Benjamin in their care? How was Joseph justified in placing such heartache on his father and brothers? A Rabbi once explained that Joseph’s previous two dreams (of the wheat bowing to him, and the stars, sun and moon bowing to him), was prophetic permission. Joseph realized when he saw his brothers bowing to him in Egypt to purchase wheat, that his previous dreams were prophetic. He realized that God had given him those earlier prophetic dreams, indicating, that when one dream comes true, i.e., when his brothers would bow for wheat, he was Divinely permitted to cause the second dream’s truth, (stars, sun and moon bowing): he was permitted by God through these dreams to use the situation of the first dream - the famine (wheat), to arrive at the second dream - metaphysical superiority, i.e., perfecting the through his scheme. Joseph now realized that he was condoned by God via these dreams, to help perfect his brothers and his father, represented in the dream as heavenly spheres bowing to Joseph, or literally, Joseph’s spiritual superiority over them. He was allowed to use the occurrence of the first dream (famine/wheat) to help perfect them, thereby realizing dream #2: perfection (“heavenly” matters). Joseph successfully recreated the identical scenario when he was sold, now embodied in the “culprit” Benjamin. He did this to force his brothers to repent for his own sale to the Ishmaelites, placing Benjamin as a stand-in for himself. The brothers were now faced with the exact same decision as when they sold Joseph: “Should we let the charges stand that Benjamin stole the viceroy’s cup and abandon him, or should we defend him?” Only with an exact scenario is “complete repentance” achieved. This was Joseph’s plan. Joseph was also successful at breaking his father’s attachment to Benjamin in the process. However, without these dreams, Joseph had no right to place others in such straits. So Joseph too was correct in his deceit, as it was demanded by God for the greater good that the brothers and Jacob become more perfected. (Rabbi Israel Chait)
Jacob’s success increasing his share while herding Laban’s flock through his checkered rods was not a case of deceit, as here too, he did so through prophetic instruction. But without such a Divine directive, it could have been deceit.
Earlier, Jacob rightfully purchased the birthright from his brother Esav. When Isaac was getting old, Rebecca instructed Jacob to deceive his blind father, as she knew an outright exposure of Esav’s true, evil nature would threaten Jacob’s receipt of his rightfully owned blessings. In order that the patriarchal blessings were successfully bestowed upon the true recipient, Rebecca told Jacob to lie. But we learn that this lie was for the greater good that Isaac blesses the true Torah personality, and not the evil son Esav.
Rachel’s theft of her father’s idols was intended to remove him from idolatry. Although Rachel went about her goal improperly, (Laban was about to kill Jacob, his daughters and their children), Rachel’s desire that her father abandon idolatry was a proper goal.
Now, what about the minister’s accusation of the Jews based on the event at Shechem? Were Simon and Levi justified in murdering the inhabitants for kidnapping and seducing their sister Dinah? The Rabbis disagree on their error. One Rabbi suggests that their sin was limited to killing those who were not directly involved in Dinah’s seduction: the violators alone were deserving of death, while the others were not. However another view suggests that when one does not reprimand another, although not committing the crime, he is equally guilty. Thus, Simone and Levi were in fact justified in killing all the males. Another view is that Jacob’s sons had no right to enforce judgment on Shechem’s inhabitants. But regardless of the view, what we learn is that a simple reading of the Written Law, the Bible, as this minister did, does not do justice to a Book which is accompanied by the Oral Law, the essential second half. The minister read verses without understanding their true meaning, and arrived at an erroneous conclusion. Had this minister followed the teachings of the Rabbis and not his own mind, which was lacking the Oral Law, he might have been impressed with the honesty of our Rabbis who accuse Simon and Levi or wrongdoing. However, the misleading information offered to Shechem according to the other Rabbi was justified.
Hillel and Shammai disputed whether lying about the beauty of one’s bride is permissible. The very dispute indicates that one favored lying. Why? This is because there exists a greater goal than honesty - in an individual case. To lie to the groom, has “peace” as its goal. This is in order to create the peaceful backdrop for a life of Torah, where a life pursuing truth may exist. Truth in an individual case must be sacrificed, if truth for the person’s greater life is to be secured. As a Rabbi once said, shall we tell the truth to a child who did something poorly and regretted his actions, if such a truth will devastate him at this early age? Of course not. A lie is not an inherently evil thing. Similarly, if a killer demands from us the location of his target, we must lie, saying we do not know.
We must also know that we cannot make determinations about our own lying as the forefathers had done. Unlike the patriarchs and matriarchs, we now have a Torah system, which outlines precise laws for when and where to act, in every matter. Additionally, we are nowhere near their level of perfection. We cannot equate ourselves to such perfected individuals, with whom God spoke, and designated as our nation’s leaders.
In summary, the Torah demands honesty in all areas of life. However, reason dictates a few cases wherein a lie must exist, so as to achieve a greater good. Therefore, provided a lie is for the ultimate goal of a Torah life, a lie is permitted. A lie is not equivalent to that which is inherently evil, such as idolatry, adultery or murder, which is never permitted under any circumstance.
By reviewing these many cases, we learn that the Torah does in fact expose when a lie is evil, but it also teaches when it is correct.

 EXAMPLE :


May 7, 2013

Infowars.com

Tonight’s Infowars Nightly News features the worldwide premiere of our groundbreaking interview with rap artist Professor Griff of Public Enemy.
Professor Griff lists Obama’s lies, describes why hip hop stars are in the White House and breaks down some of the world’s deadliest corporations.
Griff has always been an outspoken voice in the hip hop community and by combining forces with Alex Jones and Infowars, he attempts to break the public’s mass-media induced coma.


World Unites Against the Illuminati: Professor Griff on Fire! | WATCH : HERE
 7 Mei 2013
  • Infowars.com presents our groundbreaking interview with rap artist Professor Griff of Public Enemy.
  • Professor Griff lists Obama's lies, describes why hip hop stars are in the White House and breaks down some of the world's deadliest corporations.
  • Griff has always been an outspoken voice in the hip hop community and by combining forces with Alex Jones and Infowars, he attempts to break the public's mass-media induced coma. 
Obama Is A Mass Media Deception: Professor Griff Trailer | WATCH : HERE
1 Mei 2013 
Coming Soon to Infowars.com is the explosive sit down interview with Public Enemy's Minister of Information, Professor Griff.


Share on Google Plus

About Octa Dandy Saiyar

Kelahiran Jakarta keturunan asli Bukittinggi, Sumatera Barat .
07 Oktober 1983.



    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 komentar:

Twitter Feed