Benny Smith I think is his name, who discovered how mass fraud would be possible by assigning a fraction to each vote rather than a whole number so that all the votes for a particular candidate could be easily manipulated en masse from this central computer.
Indeed, a point of liberal outrage for the last dozen years (the daily show ran a bit on the security issues with Diebold machines specifically and electronic voting generally back in 2004, when it was first in the news). I'm glad you agree.
She also says her information shows it's been manipulated for Hillary and against Trump.
I remember when liberals were complaining about them and part of our method of persuading the conservatives was to say that one day it might not be the Republicans that have the most power to manipulate electronic voting. You should have listened in 2004 rather than dismissing or mocking liberals for being sore losers. Still - the rightmost conservatives have now got another shot at having 4 years to fix it. I'm sure Trump, should he have more power to manipulate votes, will not do as others are feared to have done, and keep that power to secure a second term and then to extend the party tenure.
Obviously you missed the news that two wrongs do not make a right.
You also missed the fact that Trump suggested any flag burning, whereas the Flag Protection Act 2005 would only criminalize 'incitement to violence' which was already a crime, but might be seen as a clarification of that point to close a potentially exploitable loophole. Inciting violence is bad, yes?
I wish he'd restrain his rhetoric.
Yes, on that we agree. The difference is that you are not a potential 'victim' of his rhetoric so to you its just embarrassing or difficult to justify. To some people the threat is destabilizing to their sense of security and wellbeing.
Of course, restraining his rhetoric has another term. It's called being 'politically correct', and you elected someone who overtly stated he wasn't going to be that.
If you wanted a right wing politician who restrained their rhetoric you should have voted for Clinton. Instead you voted for an ambiguous wing person who over promised to the right wing, who particularly attempted to mobilize the far-right with extreme rhetoric about torturing, deporting, murdering, and profaning foreigners.
He's not going to be able to do some of the things he might like to do.
Naturally. People seem to elect presidents on legislative promises, rather than any executive ones. That said given his stated aims, and that as many people as did, supported those stated aims, and those aims were often very right wing....you can see why people are concerned.
You won't believe the evidence that the violence at his rallies was provoked by the left, though it's about as good evidence as anybody gets for such things;
Isn't a shame that a professional liar whose job is to use editing and implication and omission to spin complete lies at the highest level, always against left institutions or people and always selling those lies to the most right wing of media groups seems to be the only person who managed to acquire this evidence.
you have to have ironclad evidence that millions of illegals and dead people voted for Hillary -- well, I do too, but meanwhile I recognize genuine sincerity when I see it and you guys have to make liars out of everybody who disagrees with you for no good reason.
So having been caught lying, being convicted of lying in court is not a good reason to claim someone is a liar?
Fox News acknowledges there is no evidence for 'millions of illegals and dead people' voting in this election. In fact, nobody even partially credible has stood by Trump's claims. It's only right-wing extremist websites that seem to be agreeing with it.
Of course, so far thousands of votes awarded to Trump have been expunged as being entirely not real. These are said to be mistakes, though it's strange that the mistakes seem to be overwhelmingly in Trump's favour. This means nothing, apparently. I'm sure if it were the other way around you wouldn't be saying 'Fake Hillary Votes proves election fraud!!!!!'
Not that he isn't guilty of shooting his mouth off at timesm, but they blow it all out of proportion and stir people up unnecessarily.
Yes, the right would never do that. Except for the last 8 years, of course.
When his mouth shootings reveal him to be ignorant, lascivious, greedy and ungodly -- manufacturing is not needed. I have no idea why you are defending him so much.
AT LEAST HE CARES ABOUT US, you know, AMERICANS, which gollyl gee, you'd think would be the first obligation of the American President.
I see no evidence that he cares about you.
Not something we could say for Obama, that's for sure, who has been selling us down the river for his entire presidency.
Well of course, according to the right wing propaganda machine, Obama will take all your guns, institute Islam and kill your grandmother. Since that didn't happen I think we can dismiss the right-wing on this. All modern Presidents sell the people down the river, stop being so selective.
Or for Hillary, who is just another tool of the puppetmasters of the Left such as Soros.
Hahaha. Well you are safe from that. Enjoy your special relationship with Putin.
What was that? $160 million went into Trump's pockets from Soros in 2004 putting the two men in close business with one another? Hrm. I guess that's not too serious.
quote:Anybody else find it odd that he would say let’s get off of George Soros?
What is the matter with you people?
The right spent years worrying about Marxism and czars and cronyism. So they elected Trump on a ticket of a populist agenda focussing on 'uplifting' the 'oppressed' classes and who then immediately engaged in egregious nepotism, cosied up to foreign businesses and Russian dictators and threatened to deport the Jews. I mean the Muslims and Mexicans.
Or if she bursts out, "Albatros!" in a crowded restaurant.
Flying Circus references are 40 years old. It's so strange to hear Americans talk about it as if it was 'British humour'. I mean, it kind of is, but only in the same way that Lucille Ball or Laverne & Shirley is 'American humour'.
That said. its odd, not bad. A woman who berates me with ''Of course it's not fucking strawberry flavoured - it's bloody bleeding seabird bloody flavour' {including the 'u' in flavour of course!} would certainly make me smile - especially if she was 6ft tall with stubble...though then I'd hope for some 'action transvestite' lines from Eddie Izzard....
quote:I also judge people by their ability to recognize or recite lines from "Young Frankenstein" which was released in 1974 (same year I was released by my mother). I consider "Young Frankenstein" and "Blazing Saddles" to be as representative of American humor as other more modern examples. Those movies still influence and inspire young American comedians.
Mel Brooks and Gene Wilder huh? I always thought their films were authentic frontier gibberish
So far the main clues I've seen are to fraud by the Democrats.
Like the clue that of the fictitious votes so far detected most of them are for Trump? Or were you talking about the clue that....erm...erm...some guy on the far right said so?
What you've done is take an irrelevant case and insinuated that it proves something about this election, which it doesn't.
So if Hillary had hired a convicted thief for her 2016 campaign; someone who was on trial for ten counts of election fraud, you'd think this was irrelevant would you? When that staffer was found guilty of having committed election fraud in the last election cycle...You wouldn't add this to your 'clues' that the Democrats were fraudsters?
I hope the avenues of fraud can be discussed and controlled or eliminated in the future. It ought to be a major discussion in both parties.
If you have to keep electronic voting, then they should be regulated, right? There should be regulations that transcend the State, either independent boards or Federal.
Here are the States that don't require their machines to meet Federal standards (as of 2009) in certifying or testing their voting machines, and how they voted in this election:
Alaska (R) Arkansas (R) Florida (R) Hawaii (D) Maine (D) Mississippi (R) Montana (R) Nebraska (R) New Hampshire (D) New Jersey (D) Oklahoma (R) Tennessee (R) Vermont (D) West Virginia (R)
Perhaps these States should be the initial focus in the discussion?
quote:The Clinton campaign suddenly cancelled their fireworks; and they did this EARLY in the morning...particularly with the Democrats...{they'll} hold back results for hours and hours and hours...what they're doing when they hold back these dense areas is they're basically figuring out...how much they need in order to tip the thing...Last night they were holding back (and it was ridiculous), they were holding back Detroit, Milwaukee...Pittsburgh...and Mantua...Mantua has nine wards - what the heck? They can't count nine wards in six hours? They were holding it back...Trump was mowing it down in the rural areas and they didn't have enough...they couldn't come up with enough... --Bev Harris
The issue is that I don't see the evidence that suggests this was the Democrats. Maybe it was, but I can't see how, for instance, in Detroit, the Democrats alone have the power to 'hold back' the results, or cause the results to have to be 'held back' if that's what happened. The Republicans may have been 'storming it', but it came down to 10k votes. Since it was expected Hilary to do well in Wayne County, they had motivation to affect the result there, still lose it, but hopefully gain just enough votes to tip the State over to (R). The numbers for Wayne County don't look all that different from 2012 other than a swing towards the Republicans.
2012: 809,660 votes between the top two 595,846 to Obama 74% 213,814 to Romney 26%
2016: 748,437 between the top two 519,444 to Clinton 69% 228,993 to Trump 31%
If shenanigans occurred, and maybe it did, these numbers don't look particularly suspect.
I don't know what Gregg Phillips' politics is, but he claims to have counted three million noncitizens on the rolls of 184 million registered voters.
He's a corrupt right winger. While working in government there was a big stink about him helping out business partners and friends get jobs and contracts. He awarded a $875,000 government contract to a business, and when the heat from his ethical problems got too much, went to work for that business. (Houston Chronicle.
But it's OK, he's a Jesus Freak so I guess his world is gold to you.
When Harris says "they" were "holding back" the results, isn't she talking about the mainstream media
No, that doesn't make sense. Local media and other witnesses will have be present for the announcement. The mainstream media could 'hold back the results' but they'd be scooped by everybody else so...
Once the count is official, it's official. It's in the public record. What the media say about it is immaterial as far as this is concerned. They are just private citizens expressing views and information in line with their company's policies.
I don't know anything about Gregg Phillips
I am certainly not likely to take seriously anything anyone at EvC says about a supposed "corrupt right-winger", of course.
quote: When Deputy Health and Human Services Commissioner Gregg Phillips and private consultant Chris Britton helped write the $1 billion legislation to privatize Texas' human services system, they apparently did so partly with an eye on profit their own.
...
Britton's company joined with one founded by Phillips to get a $670,000 state contract in January 2004 from the Workforce Commission, a state agency run by Temple, one of Phillips' longtime friends. Phillips once headed the human services system in Mississippi, where legislators criticized him for giving a major state contract to a company, then going to work for the firm. In Texas, Phillips played a role in a major state contract going to another former employer in 2003. Phillips also apparently helped a business partner, Paige Harkins, get work advising companies on how to win Texas human services privatization contracts that he could influence. On at least one occasion, records indicate Harkins set up a meeting between Phillips and potential state vendors. Britton's consulting company explored bidding on state contracts that were mandated by legislation primarily drafted by himself and Phillips during the 2003 Legislature. "The bottom line is the assistants or deputies oftentimes make multimillion-dollar decisions about the allocation of state resources, and they should be covered by laws that prohibit them from profiting from making those decisions," said ethics-reform advocate Tom "Smitty" Smith of Public Citizen.
...
But Phillips left as the head of the Mississippi Department of Human Services in 1995 under fire from the Legislature for his management of the state welfare programs. Lawmakers later that year accused him of ethics violations.
As human services director, Phillips had given an $875,000 state contract to a company that he went to work for when he left state government.
"Mr. Phillips' actions create the appearance of impropriety, facilitating an erosion of the public trust," said the Mississippi Joint Committee on Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review
His reputation doesn't exactly suggest he trustworthy. He claims to have completed an analysis nobody believes is possible based on available data and he will happily publish his conclusions but stridently avoids showing his work towards those conclusions so nobody can verify. This is so grotesquely irresponsible that it is in itself evidence against the character of the man and should be a warning flag to avoid trusting his baseless assertions.
quote:When did a tweet become news? I’m just like a guy. I’m an ordinary guy. There are billions of tweets every single day and because somebody picked it up, made something of something I wrote, all of a sudden the president-elect is talking about me? No he’s not referring to me. He’s not referring to our information. He’s not referring to our analysis. He was referring to a Washington Post story from 2014 and, the idea all of a sudden a tweet is news — it’s not news, I mean, I didn’t testify in court.
Seriously, is a tweet really news? Isn’t everything on Twitter fake? --Gregg Phillips
I hope that both he and Bev Harris will eventually give us more substantial evidence for their claims.
In the case of Bev, I happily concur regarding the potential, or actual problems in electronic voting machines - and that these vulnerabilities are probably being exploited by somebody, or everybody. But she has not provided any evidence that the Democrats are substantially more guilty than anyone else. I would suggest that she once used liberal outrage to publicize her work and try to achieve her activist goals, now she is using right-wing outrage to the same ends.
Phillips? He just said something. Nobody has any reason to believe his word. He has not backed it up in any way. We don't need *more* substantial evidence, we need *some*.
I do not trust ANYTHING you can drum up about Gregg Phillips.
Why not? I haven't lied or mislead you before. If a local Texas newspaper's investigation or the opinion of the Mississippi Joint Committee on Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review, the public record and his own words are insufficient can I ask you a question?
Why do YOU believe HIM (who is a perfect stranger in your eyes) on HIS word alone, but you dismiss ME (someone who has always endeavoured to treat you charitably and fairly, despite it not always being reciprocated) when I provide numerous sources and links for you to investigate for yourself?
I refuse to get into the ad hominems here.
I'm afraid when all we have is a man's word, his character and trustworthiness is all we can discuss.
All I care about is whether he can eventually justify his claim that he found three million noncitizen voters on the rolls.
And until then, stop spreading unsubstantiated rumours from people with questionable ethical histories!
I can see why it would take time to verify all that, I just hope he will do it.
As I said, he should not have announced a conclusion of this nature UNTIL he had verified it OR He should have released his data and methods so that his conclusion could be independently verified.
He has chosen to make claims but then not release his evidence until after verification at some undisclosed time. This is the most obviously unethical way around of doing it.
Why do you trust someone who has proven to be irresponsible? Who has stated (and verified he stated) "Seriously, is a tweet really news? Isn’t everything on Twitter fake?"
If I found a Twitter account from someone and I said I didn't know who they were but they said 'Trump paid Russian hackers to steal the election, evidence to follow, in a few months, maybe' and you found out from Alex Jones that that person had been a President and Financial Controller of a local DNC, had a government job where he took away people's guns, spread Islam in High Schools, set up death panels in the hospitals, stole money to give to the cultural Marxists and Jesuits, if he had been the MD of a Democrat Super PAC and whose Twitter feed had been in support of Hillary for President for the last 12 months....would you give it ANY weight of consideration? Or would you dismiss it as obviously Democrat stooges lies?
even the apparently peaceable ones and the ones who interpret Islam in a more peaceful way, because there is always the possibility that any believer in Islam can be radicalized under the right circumstances.
Deceptive propaganda.
But Islam is an evil ideology.
Lies.
And although the term "Islamophobe" is just nasty propaganda
Lies.
I'll cop to it
Welcome to the 21st Century version of anti-semitism Faith.
it is an evil barbarian murderous ideology that wants to rule the world
Lies
Why when I mention what MIGHT happen in the future under current Leftist trends do you all so inanely point out that it hasn't happened YET as if that's relevant?
Lazy speculation intent on spreading fear.
These things are happening in Europe where they are laboring under political correctness to a far greater extreme than we are
I've been there, I woke up there this morning, in fact. You can't lie to me as easily as you were lied to.
give it a decade or so before even you may have to admit the reality of the problem
The problem is already well defined and understood. You just believe a different solution is better. Better that thousands of Muslims die than dozens of Europeans, right?
Trump's presidency may help push back the tide here if one of your guys doesn't manage to assassinate him before he can.
Don't forget mad women in boxes:
quote: The great majority of a nation is so feminine in its character and outlook that its thought and conduct are ruled by sentiment rather than by sober reasoning. This sentiment, however, is not complex, but simple and consistent. It is not highly differentiated, but has only the negative and positive notions of love and hatred, right and wrong, truth and falsehood.
quote:We were also those who for the first time made major efforts to explain to the people a danger that had crept up on us, and which millions of people did not recognize, even though it threatened to ruin us all: the danger of the Muslims
quote:The Republican worldview has in recent years opened the eyes of the greater part of our people to this problem. The American people has recognized that the Muslims have crept in like a parasite not only into our people, but into all the peoples of the earth, and that it is attempting to corrupt the original cultures of the peoples in order to destroy them, and thereby rule over them.
quote:Despite the fact that they feel so secure, at least for the moment, the Muslims are thinking hard about why the awakened peoples of America are defending themselves against them. Nothing reveals his uncertainty about the path their laws dictate to world domination than what we often read in the works of Muslim authors
It is in part this uncertainty that drives the Muslims to pursue their goal of world domination more quickly and more consistently. Even John Adams wrote: The Muslim will not spare us. We can be sure that this is more true today than ever before.
quote:We Republicans believe Trump when he says that at the end of the battle, unleashed on us as his strongest adversary by the Islamic world parasite, Islam in America will be eradicated. Until this cleansing occurs, we must always remember that Islam is our absolute enemy who will shrink at nothing. Muslims know but a single goal: our complete destruction.
quote:The so-called educated classes mocked and scorned the Republican Party as it began its struggle, particularly when Donald Trump repeatedly said that Islam was problematic. They rejected Trump's statement that all of decent humanity suffers today under Islam. At best, they laughed about such fanatics. Of course, one had often had bitter experiences with the practices of individual Muslims, but people did not realize that Islam concealed itself as a brotherhood. Their own sentiments prevented them from drawing the logical conclusion. They did not want to recognize the true nature of this so-called brotherhood.
quote:The great mass of Muslims, however, was incapable of overcoming their appearances. That became clear to each American who wanted to see as he observed Muslims after 2001 from a politically trained viewpoint. In comparison with us, what a difference in conduct and behavior. A Christian who must spend a long time in poverty even under the most primitive of conditions, will behave as a Christian. They will maintain dignity and personal appearance. In particular, they will not lose their sense of the necessity of spiritual cleanliness.
It is exactly the opposite with Muslims. As long as they, with the help of lies, are striving for full equality with the host people, attempting to deceive them about their drive for absolute rule, the Muslim exerts himself to the fullest to resist his own drives, in order that he may behave as expected. But at the very moment that these pressures, for whatever reason, disappear, he sinks back into the filth, even if he has seemed to be a cultivated Muslim for decades.
In a way we cannot understand, he stops taking care of his soul and conscience. After perhaps only a few days, and certainly after a few weeks, he reveals once more the original appearance of Islam: the violence and cruelness. It had only been a facade. Even over decades, he had been unable to change his real nature, nor had he wanted to. Never has a Muslim, if he was honest, had any real interest in learning from his host people. After all, he was firmly convinced that he would one day be lord of his host people, and that he could then impose his law on them, also in the physical realm.
That bothered me too, that Trump rejects the standard explanation of the downing of the twin towers, as I've considered the "truthers" to be total nuts questioning that.
But I hadn't heard his particular take on it before: how could a plane just slice through those vertical steel frames that girded the outside of the entire building, segments of which we can see standing eerily in the wreckage afterward?
That's pretty standard 9/11 truther nonsense to be honest, surprised you hadn't heard it.
Take two empty drinks cans. It is likely you can stand on the top of them and they'll support your weight. Now hold one of them firmly in one hand and with on finger push into the side of the can. Observe how easy it is to crush it in that direction compared with the other.
Also note, there was a denser packing of support columns at the bottom of the building.
Wouldn't the wings of the plane just be sheared off by the collision?
Sure, but then the wings of a 767 are not light objects and they were going at 500mph. This stupendous amount of momentum is not going to be stopped trivially.
In fact wouldn't the metal body of the whole plane just break up?
Well...it did. But that didn't eradicate the momentum. The fragments continue to move at stupendous rates even as some frontal parts are being slowed by support columns.
Instead it cut right through the skin of the building like butter.
130T of metal, fuel, people and luggage travelling at 500mph is incredibly difficult to stop or at least significantly redirect within 14 inches. I expect even a mountain would have difficulty with the task. After that initial barrier, there are no support columns until the centre of the building, so debris has clear paths in all directions until the centre.
(130,0000 / 2) x 200 x 200 = 2,600,000,000 Joules of energy.
That's half a ton of dynamite exploding, in a single direction. Oh and then that's not including the amount of energy contained in the fuel itself when combusted: 10,000 gallons of jet fuel has about 1,422,000,000,000 Joules of energy in it - although that was not directional and most of it went up the sides of the building I expect.
The Hoover dam *can* put out about 2GJ a second. Most power stations put out like 10-50 Million Joules a second.
It's pretty catastrophic. For comparison the Gunpowder Plot of Fawkes et al, used 2.5T of gunpowder which was thought to be 20-30 times more than was needed to convincingly destroy the House of Lords...being underground meant there was more directionality.
And maybe just the speed of the plane is enough to account for it?
One was at near 500 the other nearly 600mph. A massive freight train probably has only 1% of the energy - those things can swat large trucks aside and carry on going. It's a phenomenal amount of energy.
quote:
In each case, the force of the speeding plane knocked out a number of vertical columns around the building perimeter, damaged large sections of floor, sent furniture and plane wreckage flying through the offices and presumably damaged support columns in each building's core. Most likely, the initial impact also destroyed the sprinkler system on those floors. The evaluation team estimates that the first plane -- a 395,000-pound (180,000-kg) Boeing 767-200ER going about 470 miles per hour (756 kph) -- fractured as many as 36 perimeter support columns over a four-story area of WTC 1's north face. The connected floors partially collapsed, and the central core suffered undefined damage. The second plane, a Boeing 767-200ER flying at about 590 miles per hour (950 kph), inflicted similar damage on WTC 2. The collision fractured as many as 32 perimeter columns over a five-story area, collapsing sections of connected floor and damaging the central core. In each attack, the crash ignited the plane's' fuel supply, causing a massive fireball -- an expanding area of burning gas. While the ignited fuel didn't really explode, the fireball did spread fire down the side of the building, throughout the nearby floors and down interior shafts to lower floors. The investigators hypothesized that nearly all of the jet fuel was consumed in the initial fireball and first few minutes of the building fire, but it ignited enough office equipment, paper and building materials to keep the fire raging until the collapse. -- FEMA
Love
Loving one another specifically means brothers and sisters IN CHRIST.
The Samaritan could be a brother. Even though he was from what was perceived to be a blasphemous and wicked religious sect by many at the time.
Helping Muslim refugees by bringing them into another culture is being an agent of violence, rape andmurder and subjugation of that culture.
quote:But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
You know, Christian refugees also result in Crime problems.
Eminent domain
quote:"... The property of subjects is under the eminent domain of the state, so that the state or he who acts for it may use and even alienate and destroy such property, not only in the case of extreme necessity, in which even private persons have a right over the property of others, but for ends of public utility, to which ends those who founded civil society must be supposed to have intended that private ends should give way. But it is to be added that when this is done the state is bound to make good the loss to those who lose their property." -- Hugo Grotius in 1625
quote:"...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." -- The Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution
During WWII the American government 'stole' 20 million acres of land for airports, infrastructure, storage, etc. Since then it has been used to expand national parks. Eminent domain was used by the government to get premises to work out of after September 11th 2001. Lots of land has been 'stolen' this along the borders, especially the Mexican border.
The Italian government are facing an emergency and some presumably thought the emergency procedures were necessary in this particular case.
But the main topic is whether a government has the right to force anyone, the example being the hotel owner, to use his hotel for any purpose against his will, such as to accommodate refugees no matter who the refugees are.
Yes. They can knock his hotel down and build a refugee support centre if they want. That is their right as the people's representatives in a sovereign democracy.
The land of the dead, the home of the knave
Also, the Crusades were a papal operation, nothing to do with the genuine Christianity which founded this country.
A good point. Say, what happened to all those native people's that roamed the land?
quote: the natives are neere all dead of the smalle Poxe, so as the Lord hathe cleared our title to what we posses. -- John Winthrop Early American Christian
quote:Philanthropy could not wish to see this continent restored to the condition in which it was found by our forefathers. What good man would prefer a country covered with forests and ranged by few thousand savages to our extensive Republic, studded with cities, towns, and prosperous farms embellished with all the improvements which art can devise or industry execute, occupied by more than 12,000,000 happy people, and filled with all the blessings of liberty, civilization, and religion. -- Andrew Jackson 1830
Toxic lies kill kids
Soon as you bleeding heart suicidal maniacs acknowledge that there could be GOOD reason in the case of Islam to be wary of Muslim refugees, then we can start talking about real ways of helping them.
There are good reasons to be wary of refugees in general. They are generally broken people, desperate and having lived for years on whatever they could get their hands on, being betrayed by the most trusted of friends...
We have Christian refugees in this country practising all sorts of weird and illegal acts. Not real Christians you say? Well there is as much reason to call them Christian as there is to call members of ISIS, Muslims.
Even if there was some degree of truth in what you say, the numbers strongly suggest the effect is small compared with the numbers of people. Can you not tolerate some crime, a few deaths, over thousands of deaths, refugee camp levels of crime?
These unfounded fears are toxic, they are killing people. I am appalled they got someone elected. I hope they were just empty campaign rhetoric, I fear not.
Wait until they have the population they have in France where they are torching the cars,
I looked into this. Turns out the rabbit trail tends to lead back to a single video of some cars on fire, the culprits of which have never been identified. Someone uploaded the video and titled it something like 'Muslims set fire to 25 cars in France' or something. And that's the source, a title of a video uploaded by some random person. That was enough to spin a story. Given the French burn cars like Americans burn flags, it's easy to build up a whole mythos around it.
and in Sweden where they are raping the women.
Again, this comes down to some very simple origins. Some women were assaulted by half a dozen youths. One of the women said they were probably 'immigrants' but this was never confirmed. Another assault happened, some of the media blamed it on Afghan refugees, but there wasn't any evidence that verified this. The sexual assault rate in Sweden has been tending downwards in the last few years.
Obviously some refugees, some immigrants and some locals will commit crimes - but they aren't the epidemic you are being sold.
The solution
Yes, this is a real dilemma because these are real suffering people. The question is how to help them without denying that Islam is evil. All you guys have to offer is denial. Try acknowledging the real danger so something realistic can come of it.
Invite them in, give them warm food and a roof over their head. Show them a better way to live. Show them Christian love and forgiveness. Let them take those memories back with them and maybe things will change.
Or you can tell them Americans are lazy fearful ignoramuses and that 'freedom' and 'Christianity' seem to lead to hate and sin.
ABE: Glancing over the rest of your post, mostly by accident, I gather you are of course hearing nothing but the Leftist propaganda. The rapes have been staggeringly increased not just in Sweden but also in the UK, something like three times the normal rate since the increase in the Muslim population. You are getting a trivializing whitewashed pack of lies.
That's not what government figures show, even ones from our Conservative government. Without reference to right-wing propaganda, can you correct me?
Oh well I guess I'll have to starve to death since I have to answer at least some of your post.
Haha, keep your strength up.
I do find that amazing, but I would have to suppose the speed was the factor that made it possible, speed and angle.
The important fact is that steel has a much higher compression strength than it does resistance to shearing forces. Much like just about any material. Trump, who makes skyscrapers, should know these things. He should know that there were big gaps between support pillars enabling most of the plane to pass almost unimpeded. He should know that a much smaller plane, a B-25 hit the Empire State Building and debris from this went clear through the building and out the other side.
So I don't see Trump's idea working either.
He should know - he built his empire out of skyscrapers, so spinning nonsense to the contrary is worrying deception or alarming incompetence.
What would it take for you to drop your overall support of Trump?
9/11 truther nonsense? Nope. Sexual harassment as a perk of his status? Nope. Clearly not a Christian? Nope. Trying to use eminent domain, a practice you compared to theft, to take people's homes so he can build a car park for wealthy gamblers? Nope. Discriminating against blacks in hiring and housing? Nope. Working with Soros? Nope. Giving money to Clinton's campaign? Nope.
However, what it would take to stop supporting Trump would be an unconscionable willingness to keep going down the Leftist path that has been destroying America,
It's a little subjective and not particularly specific.
So is there anything reasonably likely? Could he go too far right wing? Could he privatise something you would disagree with? Native American homelands {to allow oil drilling} Highways Medicare Fire Service Police Military Government
Is there a morality law that would go too far Prison for women who get abortions? Prison for women who can't prove their rape allegations are true?
Any business corruption? If he signed a deal with the Russians to supply them with billions of dollars of defence equipment? If he acquired churches to build casinos?
Any sexual misconduct? Cheated on his wife? Sexual harassment?
Most of your list is fake news from the MSM
Much of my list is a matter of public record, either Trump's own words or court documents in suits against him. Is there anything on it that, if true, would result in you turning against him.
I mean you were content to condemn Obama on the basis of random people making claims against him. Obama only had to look at a socialist and this was guilt by association. Did he decide to be diplomatic and not alienate and insult over a billion people? He's obviously a Muslim. I'm just trying to understand why Trump gets the latitude he gets from you.
There's lots more but there's no point in wearing myself out for people who don't care about the truth.
Hi Faith. I am fairly sure I have been polite and kind-hearted towards you. I have always attempted, as far as humanly possible, to treat your posts with respect and to assume the strongest possible interpretation of your claims. I've spent hours watching Alex Jones videos just so I can provide the thread with the specific statements that support you that you won't - that you only hint exists somewhere. I don't get CNN here. I don't get FOX News. I don't get MSNBC. I don't get any of that stuff. Any news story that interests me - I will look for the original source material and assess from there.
I have scolded you in the past about how you regularly smear me as a liar or other unpleasant things.
Why? Is your hatred simply what I should come to expect from a True Christian? Are Christians incapable of having a conversation with someone with whom they have some disagreements without insulting them like this? Honestly, Faith, this kind of dismissal is disgusting. Merry Christmas.
He says things straight out that we've been dying to hear, those of us who voted for him.
Yeah I get why you support him. I heard what he was saying too, and it sounded like an amoral psychopath pandering to the far right. I was just wondering if he there was anything TOO right wing he could say or do. Anything he has been accused off, that if true, would turn you off him.
When George Bush said Islam is a religion of peace that was the moment I turned from him.
I'd prefer to agree with Abdolkarim Soroush than ISIS.
I think most of your speculations are just silly. Prison for abortions? Give me a break.
Absurd? Yes? Unrealistic? Unfortunately not. Oklahoma's legislature voted to pass a bill that could send doctors to prison for up to three years and only isn't the law because the governor vetoed it (but only because it was too vaguely written, not because it was intrinsically insane).
Given Trump aired the notion that women should receive some form of punishment, and given the 'abortion is murder / the worst holocaust ever' arguments, prison sentences seem reasonable. If abortion is murder, why the hell wouldn't we send the perpetrators to prison? Killing babies is basically the worst kind of murder isn't it? Life sentences or death penalties all around, would seem to be the only reasonable conclusion to the right-wing rhetoric, if they were sincere - which I think we agree they are not.
If Trump were to persuade the legislature and the judicial branch to punish women or doctors, would that be too far, as silly as it may be to think about it.
IF he had Hilary Clinton arrested? If his tax returns show business dealings which are significantly against American interests?
Anything other than 'shifting towards the left'?
A few random people against Obama? What are you referring to?
The birther nonsense you bought springs to mind. I seem to remember Conservatives, don't know if you were among them, harping on about Ayers for a while. And of course any tenuous link anyone claims regarding Soros.
It was EvC in general I was addressing as uninterested in the truth.
It was with me you were discussing the subject. I was included as you decided to not give details because there was 'no point' for 'for people who don't care about the truth.'. If I wasn't included, then I'd like to hear more detail. I'm not interested in destroying or dismissing your arguments. I may make counterpoints, that is the theme of a debate forum, but I am interested to hear your thoughts.
I only recently started listening to Alex jones, since election day.
I've seen some of his shows over the years, he's kind of 'prone to exaggeration'. The point is that you alluded to some information that was on his show, and I ended up listening to several hours of his stuff to try and find what you were talking about. I then presented the video and a rough transcript, to support your argument. I'd hope at some point I'd earn some quality time of yours in return.
I used to make a bigger effort to support my points than I do now. It's not worth it here. If I'm going to be dismissed anyway what's the point?
What's the point of making the points if you aren't going to bother to explain how you know your points are correct?
Bring your works into the light, Faith,
quote: that {your} deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
quote:do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.
after all your knowledge is rich and you should therefore be
™ Version 4.2
(1)
