• ChristIsKing.eu has moved to ChristIsKing.cc - see the announcement for more details. If you don't know your password PM a mod on Element or via a temporary account here to confirm your username and email.

Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel

It is not good how fast someone can walk up to the Bishop in the middle of a service. It would be good for every church to have an organized, if not robust, security detail that is strategically placed in close proximity to the Preacher, as well as in a place that is able to observe the entry points of the building.
It would be good for the Western world to not be flooded with Muslims but there you go...
 
If he shouted "Allahu Akbar" it becomes even more unlikely to me it's anything auhtentic.

Christians are and were not persecuted by muslims, but by political leaders. Like in the reformation, it wasn't protestants that killed Catholics, but elites waving a protestant flag being irritated by Catholics that didn't accept their authority. Ofcourse masses are easily playable.

Many wars we deem religious are post modern propaganda in my opinion.

Let's see how it plays out, but it seems a low key 9/11 play to me, stirring up some Christian hate to muslims and the other way around. Next we will find a bloody passport and have some group claim the attack. Divide the masses chapter #3940

Let's see.
Yeah I mean, just as an Australian, something is fishy.
The whole idea of the basement dwlling Jihadi Muslim...is so 2014-2015. I'm from a different big city, but from what I see day to day, most young Muslims have just moved on from this idea. From their perspective, Islam is already slowly taking over suburbs, they don't even 'need' to do that stuff any more.

It just seems totally out of nowhere. The fact that that guy was smiling, also confuses me. If he truly had personal hatred for the Bishop, you'd think he wouldn't be too happy that the knife didn't open, and that he didn't 'finish the job' that he was embarking on.

It just seems so out of place.
 
If he shouted "Allahu Akbar" it becomes even more unlikely to me it's anything auhtentic.

Christians are and were not persecuted by muslims, but by political leaders. Like in the reformation, it wasn't protestants that killed Catholics, but elites waving a protestant flag being irritated by Catholics that didn't accept their authority. Ofcourse masses are easily playable.

Many wars we deem religious are post modern propaganda in my opinion.

Let's see how it plays out, but it seems a low key 9/11 play to me, stirring up some Christian hate to muslims and the other way around. Next we will find a bloody passport and have some group claim the attack. Divide the masses chapter #3940

Let's see.
Those political leaders were Muslims
 
Yeah I mean, just as an Australian, something is fishy.
The whole idea of the basement dwlling Jihadi Muslim...is so 2014-2015. I'm from a different big city, but from what I see day to day, most young Muslims have just moved on from this idea. From their perspective, Islam is already slowly taking over suburbs, they don't even 'need' to do that stuff any more.

It just seems totally out of nowhere. The fact that that guy was smiling, also confuses me. If he truly had personal hatred for the Bishop, you'd think he wouldn't be too happy that the knife didn't open, and that he didn't 'finish the job' that he was embarking on.

It just seems so out of place.
I think Mari-Mari might have said something against Mohammad and Islam he stepped on their toes, like the French cartoonist who did a Mohammad cartoon, they killed him for that, Muslims get upset when their ideas are challenged and they think they living in an Islamic country.
 
It is not good how fast someone can walk up to the Bishop in the middle of a service. It would be good for every church to have an organized, if not robust, security detail that is strategically placed in close proximity to the Preacher, as well as in a place that is able to observe the entry points of the building.
Would it not be sacrilegious to bring armed guards into a church, or to stain it with the blood of an attacker? Genuine question.
 
Wish in one hand...

This isn't the first time something like this has happened; shootings in churches, people rushing the pastor, etc. Get a good security team.

I have been suggesting for over two decades, that if kumbaya Christians want to embrace multicultural liberation theology, they will need to train warrior monks.
 
As well as the Armenian genocide and other massacres by Muslims against European Christians from this and past centuries.

The YoungTurks were atheists led by chief atheist Ataturk, so, I chalk up the genocides of Christians at the end of WW1 to atheists not Islam.

Exactly the same as in the Bolshevik Revolution. I'll take Islam over atheist scum any day of the week.

In places where Islam is strong, ironically, you have significant Christian minorities. In places where Chews rule, zero Christians or active genocide.

Islam is bad, but nothing compared to atheists or chews. Islam is also very easy to deal with, since it is the enemy you can see. Always fear the enemy inside the gates, not the ones outside of the gates.

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”​


Therefore, with Bishop Mar Mari, I'm wondering less about whether or not this guy was Muslim, or if he was being (((paid))).
 
Last edited:
Would it not be sacrilegious to bring armed guards into a church, or to stain it with the blood of an attacker? Genuine question.
I know they often have off duty police on the outside of many churches providing traffic security.
I don't think, in the US, that a church can have a policy advocating for badges church members carrying guns... But if you conceal carry, then it's a non issue.
 
Insane how much some people here defend the muslims. You are blind. Sometimes the truth IS infront of you. I live in a country with 30% of muslims and I tell you, would I say at night on the street to a group of muslims the same things Mar Mari said about Mohammed, one out of two times I would land in a hospital. Its just reality. The enemy is already within. No need to blame Blumenthal in Tel Aviv for everything.
 
Would it not be sacrilegious to bring armed guards into a church, or to stain it with the blood of an attacker? Genuine question.
My church has deacons carrying concealed weapons, plus video surveillance, and other measures. There have been church massacres in my area, and our church is in a moderately high crime area.

I think it is only prudent for a church to take at least some measures like this, depending on the local risks. There is no Christian sacred obligation to let a gunman come into your church unopposed to slaughter your people. It is morally just to stop them with lethal force if necessary.
 
Insane how much some people here defend the muslims. You are blind. Sometimes the truth IS infront of you. I live in a country with 30% of muslims and I tell you, would I say at night on the street to a group of muslims the same things Mar Mari said about Mohammed, one out of two times I would land in a hospital. Its just reality. The enemy is already within. No need to blame Blumenthal in Tel Aviv for everything.

A couple of questions for you, do you believe that muslims/ISIS slaughtered 100+ Russians in Moscow last month, or that AQ did 9/11?
 
A couple of questions for you, do you believe that muslims/ISIS slaughtered 100+ Russians in Moscow last month, or that AQ did 9/11?

I was thinking about this very thing after one of the earlier posts. I understand those guys who shot up the city hall in Russia were offered about $11K to do the deed.

Are they innocent then? Does all the guilt lie upon those who set this up, and the men who took the offer for $11K are innocent of killing 140 people? Just human pawns with no agency of their own?

Likewise, whether Mossad or some other agency ultimately made 9/11 happen, surely Mohammad Atta and the other hijackers were on those planes and flew them into the buildings.

Are they innocent as well? If they did what others told them to do, do they bear none of the responsibility for those deaths?

My answer is that muslims definitely killed those people in Russia, and muslims definitely hijacked planes for 9/11, and flew them into things.

Note: I know that people question the plane hitting the pentagon, but my understanding is that a plane was hijacked, and something happened to it. People were on cell phones talking to their loved ones before the plane disappeared, and I understand they could see that they were above DC. I would say muslims did that.
 
Last edited:
The enemy is already within. No need to blame Blumenthal in Tel Aviv for everything.
But it was Berg/Baum/Stein that brought Abdul to Your neighborhood.
I have no love for the muslim, but it's the Israeli foreign policy that set their countries a flame, it's the jewish financed NGOs that ship them into the west, and the subverted governments that accomodate and settle the invaders in our communities.
And even when You look into the past, You'll find historical examples of jews opening the gates for the muslims to come.
 
But it was Berg/Baum/Stein that brought Abdul to Your neighborhood.
I have no love for the muslim, but it's the Israeli foreign policy that set their countries a flame, it's the jewish financed NGOs that ship them into the west, and the subverted governments that accomodate and settle the invaders in our communities.
And even when You look into the past, You'll find historical examples of jews opening the gates for the muslims to come.
Yes, this is true.

If a Jew brings a crazy maniac into your house, and the crazy maniac chops up your children, is the crazy maniac an innocent pawn, or are they bad?

If muslims are known killers, and the jews take advantage of this fact to introduce muslims into places where the jews want some killing to happen, aren't the muslims still known killers?
 
I was thinking about this very thing after one of the earlier posts. I understand those guys who shot up the city hall in Russia were offered about $11K to do the deed.

Are they innocent then? Does all the guilt lie upon those who set this up, and the men who took the offer for $11K are innocent of killing 140 people? Just human pawns with no agency of their own?
One world order.

Same propaganda.

Muslim bad, irrational, just out there to kill random people. I think nobody died in Moscow, it's the same propaganda, Muslims are after you.

Christians, random civilians, if you are on the streets and see an arabic guy he might be there to kill you.

Likewise, whether Mossad or some other agency ultimately made 9/11 happen, surely Mohammad Atta and the other hijackers were on those planes and flew them into the buildings.
Nobody flew in the buildings, controlled demolition.

Are they innocent as well? If they did what others told them to do, do they bear none of the responsibility for those deaths?
Maybe we can blame the actors yes for acting. The real fools are those moved by this propaganda.
My answer is that muslims definitely killed those people in Russia, and muslims definitely hijacked planes for 9/11, and flew them into things.
Mine not.
Note: I know that people question the plane hitting the pentagon, but my understanding is that a plane was hijacked, and something happened to it. People were on cell phones talking to their loved ones before the plane disappeared, and I understand they could see that they were above DC. I would say muslims did that.
Thanks for bringing up the other muslim stories, i think the broader story presents what I mean to say.

We are constantly being divided; men vs women, blacks vs whites, muslims vs christians, children vs parents.

How come we never hear about anyone attacking one of these fools in the leadership that locked us in our houses for a year?

The only leaders killed in can think of now is Milosevic of serbia who was killed in prison in The Hague, or Khadafi, or Sadam, each of which criticized the rotten world order. Or the nationalist anti-European Polish cabinet that was shot down.
 
I was thinking about this very thing after one of the earlier posts. I understand those guys who shot up the city hall in Russia were offered about $11K to do the deed.

Are they innocent then? Does all the guilt lie upon those who set this up, and the men who took the offer for $11K are innocent of killing 140 people? Just human pawns with no agency of their own?

Likewise, whether Mossad or some other agency ultimately made 9/11 happen, surely Mohammad Atta and the other hijackers were on those planes and flew them into the buildings.

Are they innocent as well? If they did what others told them to do, do they bear none of the responsibility for those deaths?

My answer is that muslims definitely killed those people in Russia, and muslims definitely hijacked planes for 9/11, and flew them into things.

Note: I know that people question the plane hitting the pentagon, but my understanding is that a plane was hijacked, and something happened to it. People were on cell phones talking to their loved ones before the plane disappeared, and I understand they could see that they were above DC. I would say muslims did that.

The planes were not flown by alleged hijackers, they were remotely controlled. One of the kingpins of the operation, dual citizen Dov Zakheim, was involved in a company that designed remote control flight systems.

The three towers (including building 7) were rigged weeks ahead of the event, and were brought down in controlled demolitions.

This is the most accurate rundown of the false flag event, arguably the most important event this century, perhaps the most important video posted in all of youtube today:

 
Last edited:
Back
Top