BPPLEE said:

The tactical team was right behind her

Click to expand...

If the cop hadn't shot her first, they'd have been justified in doing so.

Yarddog said:

With all due respect to the family, she should not be honored by the US, unless they can show how her military service damaged her mentally. Otherwise, she is a criminal that tried to illegally stop a Congressional duty to certify the 2020 election.

Click to expand...

Was. Was a criminal. As Thomas Jefferson said, the dead are nothing, and nothing cannot be something.

wing2000 said:

I find it strange that you make such assumptions.

Click to expand...

I wonder how many posts you've posted condemning the actions of Hamas and their Palestinian supporters in comparison to the number youve posted condemning the actions of Israel.

rjs330 said:

You have to prove that these will actually reduce firearm deaths. And to what extent. How many deaths from firearms is an acdeptable reduction?

Click to expand...

California is a good example of how well stronger gun laws work.



In the 1990s, California had the third highest gun homicide rate – over 50% above the national average – and its gun death rate was substantially higher than the rest of the country. As the state added more gun safety protections, more lives were saved and the trendlines reversed. From 1993 to 2017, California’s firearm mortality rate declined by 55 percent—almost four times the decrease in the rest of the nation. Many of California’s most important firearm laws went into effect in the early 1990s. As California continued to enact strong firearm laws, its firearm death rate continued to decline.”

It's not just California:

It was a re-distribution of the land. Note the hyphen.

God originally distributed the land among the Israelites.

In the jubilee year, it was distributed again.

Re-distributed.

Which is different from redistributed.

tdidymas said:

Well, since you pipe into my conversation with the other poster, I'll answer your question. I was taught a global Earth (spherical). This was during the years 1960-1972. I didn't hear that any modern people believed in a flat world until I heard of "The Flat Earth Society" around 1980. I thought it ridiculous that anyone would believe in a flat earth until I learned about conspiracy theories and urban legends. Then I understood.

But regarding my previous response, I thought it was relevant because I was pointing out that the flat earth theory has been around since pre-history.

Click to expand...

That is not something we're unaware of.

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

It is not professional at all

Click to expand...

What's unprofessional about a prosecutor saying she'll prosecute criminals if elected to the office of prosecutor?

It's what prosecutors do.

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

and could bias things against him.

Click to expand...

If Trump's legal team believed that, they could have argued it in court. Of course, to claim it now you'd have to prove that the judge displayed bias against Trump in his judgment. Can you?

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

She is NOT like everyone else....she is an AG.

Click to expand...

So? AG's have freedom of speech too, ya know. They can voice their opinions same as everyone else.

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

If Engoron wasn't biased then there would be no reason to rule it as excessive and against the Constitution!

Click to expand...

Did you read how they determined the amount of the disgorgement? Where was the bias in that determination?

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

It was a witch hunt pure and simple.

Click to expand...

"Witch hunts" typically don't have a preponderance of evidence like this trial had. That's kinda why we call them that.

-- A2SG, have you seen what kind of evidence they didn't have against Rebecca Nurse or Giles Corey?

linux.poet said:

It’s bad. My nervous system is locking up my frontal lobes and shutting down my emotions by turns. Heart rate goes up by turns as well.

I need God to show me what course of action will resolve the fear, because I think my brain is afraid of a course of action, or something. But an overloaded brain isn’t really good at listening, so He needs to yell loud.

I’m going to go get some chamomile tea for temporary relief.

Click to expand...

I just saw a youotube video where anxiety and or fear is more common in highly intelligent people. The reasoning is that they think and analyze more than the average person and in all those additional scenarios it can be not only startling but it is harder for them to stay calm. So that may apply to you.

You might try reading some Christian books on the subject. The free internet archive has several you can read online.

If your heart rate is an issue, there are of course medications that can help. I would suggest using something sparingly under a doctor's advice if your health continues to be a concern. I pray that you can hear God even in a distressed condition. That you can find the root cause of your fear and that you can find physical and mental wellness through God.

Chesterton said:

So who are the people dressed up as antifa?

Click to expand...

Does Antifa have an official uniform? Is this specified in their Articles of Organisation?

Even my more conservative Aussie mates agree with this sentiment from Aussie investigative reporter Michael Pascoe.

He then unpacks how most democratic leaders are wincing and looking away - and are not yet truly able to admit what has just happened. China is already leaping into the gap provided by America’s withdrawal from the global marketplace. But America’s arrogance will do what tariffs always do - drive down the quality of their goods while driving up the price - and reduce their ‘soft power’ around the world. The biggest cost? We will see what America truly is:-



He shows how America bribing Greenland and threatening Canada have fundamentally changed what America is. That we need to back out of AUKUS - yet as Australia goes into election mode - we’re not even discussing it. The world is still in denial. For now.
And as the NYT said:-




Or as French politician and former member of the European Parliament - Mr Claude Malhuret said:

Oompa Loompa said:

@Always in His Presence this is exactly why the DNC is going to collapse.

Click to expand...

Simply because I don't know what issue that poster is referring to? Wow, who knew I had such power over the party??

-- A2SG, if only I could use this power for good and not evil....

Always in His Presence said:

They have been named - their pictures shown - their crimes spoken of in the media, they Whitehouse and different agencies news conferences -

Click to expand...

I must not have seen whatever media these reports showed up in. So I still have no idea who you're talking about. The only criminal defended by any major US political party that I know of is Donald Trump.

Always in His Presence said:

I'm thinking you might need new news sources - it's just a thought

Click to expand...

I tend to check out a pretty wide variety of sources, I don't depend on a single media outlet, but, again, I don't have time to view everything from everywhere. If you'd care to share this information you have, then perhaps we'll both know what you're talking about.

-- A2SG, or you can let it remain mysterious....your call, really....

The Barbarian said:

Now you're drifting off into Poke'mon.

Click to expand...

To clarify, I was referring to an actual theory from the 60's regarding how whales came to be.

All I will say is that I hate the discontinuity of some of the netflix series. This is because they seem to end each season like it may or may not be renewed. I can't say if they really know or not. Outer Banks for instance is that way. Each season brings some new adventure. Sure the characters are the same but the plot just expands to a new vein. On the other hand, I thought Squid Game was great because it had the story that built upon the last. " Director Hwang confirmed that 'Squid Game Season 3' would mark the series' conclusion. He explained, " It’s true that Season 3 will be the finale. I’ve conveyed everything I wanted to express through this series, so continuing beyond that doesn't hold meaning for me."

But will someone else just start a new game, new location, based on the same premise? If so it could be entertaining but kind of like the walking dead types of series. There was way too much overkill in those multiple series.

Aldebaran said:

Only when a gun owner thinks his own gun rights won't be affected.

Click to expand...

I doubt there would be any gun owners approving of certain gun control measures if they felt they would be affecting their rights.

Aldebaran said:

Here's a directory to the gun laws already in existence in all 50 states. Kind of puts to rest the idea that guns are unregulated: State Laws and Published Ordinances - Firearms (35th Edition) | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Let me know when you finish reading them all.

Click to expand...

Of course guns are already regulated; nobody's saying otherwise. The problem is that they vary so much from one state to another. If stronger gun laws like those found in California were to be applied at the federal level, gun violence would drop dramatically nationwide.

Ophiolite said:

No. I have rejected it, something you recognise later.

Click to expand...

Yes you reject it and I am rejecting or rather questioning your rejection. Thats how it works. Just because you reject this does not equate that your rejection is justified according to the evidence. You have to then support that rejection with evidence.

I am presenting some 'out of place' examples and so far you have not explained how this could have been done with the primitive tools found in the records that are claimed to have created these signatures.

This is part of supporting the idea that knowledge and advanced tech is not necessarily a gradual progression from primitive to modern. That it can rise and fall, come and go and that there may have been far more advanced peoples than we giove credit for.

Ophiolite said:

I haven't given any explanations for tool signature. This is at least the third instance in which you have claimed I had said certain things that I had not. I appreciate that you are conducting lengthy exchanges with several members, but repeated errors of this kind are sloppy.

Click to expand...

OK sorry, it may have been someone else. I neglected to check. Yes I am talking to a few people lol.

After checking I can see the problem I think. Yes you have not provided any explanation for the tool signatures. But you have stipulated what kind of evidence we should be using. That is the problem I am talking about.

As I said the very nature of questioning the orthodoxy makes it a fringe endeavor and there is little to find as far as what I have linked so far. What I cannot understand is why you and I or anyone cannot in the first instance make arguements for what these signatures represent.

You don't have to be a rocket scientiosts or have peer reviewed support to know the impossibility of some of these signatures due to restrictions in using a hand saw. But I agree that going into more detail for some of the more questionable examples is probably needed to clearly tell one way or another.

But I hesitate as really this is not what the thread is about. I only thought going into a couple of examples may be enough to at least allow people to see that there is some truth to a higher degree of advanced knowleged in the past than we thought. Even on par with todays level of knowledge or surpassing it.

But it looks like now that the thread has side tracked into proving specific cases to convince people is inevitable. But even then I still don't think anyone will change their view because fundementally this is about ones worldview beliefs.

Ophiolite said:

No. They don't meet well established ideas of what evidence is.

Excutive Summary

The problem is two distinct epistemologies.

• I support the scientifc method, in its current expression, which has a superlative track record of investigating the natural world.
• You support an ill defined method that produces almost no positive results and lacks the ability, or willingness to self-criticise.

Merci beaucoup, c'est finis.

Click to expand...

And thank you. Though not finished lol.

I think its a false representation of the epistemology. That you have restricted it to either the scientific method and all else is classed as unreal or false or make believe is the issue.

I mentioned Indigenous knowledge which was relegated as the unreal and superstition. Only to be later found to be actually more knowledgable than the current science. Almost a natural and spiritual way of existence with nature.

A deeper knowledge of reality that did not just involve empircile sciences. But that the material science in insisting on a particular methodology dismissed as unreal and outdated.

The problem is the dogma of forcing a particular way to know our history through scientific naturalism. Which fundementally is a metaphysical belief in how the world is and not science itself when its forcing others to conform to such a criteria while relegating all other ways of knowing as unreal or superstition.

It may be that these ancient peoples had a high level of knowledge about nature, manipulating nature even surpassing all the decades of research science has made to only just begin to understand.

But because these ancient people are suppose to be primitive, have less knowledge than today everything is put into the conspiracy basket. These ancients could not possibly have advance knowledge and tech greater than today. We are suppose to be more advanced.

Hentenza said:

But your argument has no basis. You are not addressing what I posted. I showed you FROM scripture where Paul knew exactly who the elect are.

Click to expand...

No he didn’t. He knows they’re followers of Christ and addresses them as such. It's not some wooden absolute knowledge, as if none could ever fall away. God, alone knows with perfect certainty who are His and who are not.

Hentenza said:

what? Did you address the scripture?

Click to expand...

Yes, go back and read it.

Hentenza said:

Romans 8-1-4 begins with therefore so what came before? Hint: the conflict of serving two natures. We do not become righteous by ourselves. If we did then why did Jesus have to die?

Click to expand...

Who said we become righteous by ourselves? Christ is the answer in Rom 7:25 because through Him I'm empowered to overcome the sin that condemns me to death.

Hentenza said:

Romans 8:12-14. But you just told me that we become righteous ourselves.

Click to expand...

When, where? We don’t become righteous by ourselves, but only by virtue of union with God, by the power of the Holy Spirit. That vital union is the primary difference between the old and new covenants. 8:12-14 follow naturally from 8:1-4. We’re not condemned because we’re empowered to overcome the sin that earns us death, the righteous requirement of the law now being met in us.

Hentenza said:

Christ died for our sins brother. His sacrifice IS sufficient. We are already justified, declared righteous.

Click to expand...

No, we we're more than aquitted sinners; we were made righteous, given the "gift of righteousness".
"For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!" Rom 5:17

"But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe." Rom 3:21-22

Now we work our our salvation with that grace. God's not a fool-and He wants more from, and, more importantly, more for us, than we know.
"Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life." Gal 6:7-8

Truth be known, you've swallowed a novel gospel, a fair bit skewed, with, again, little in common with the early fathers or early church teachings.

ThatRobGuy said:

Is there any data you're referencing there to suggest that they're not interested? Is their "lack of looking" because they're not interested? Or because the current requirement makes it so they don't have a shot so they have a "why bother" attitude towards it?

Click to expand...

My understanding is that it has more to do with the way compensation and advancement are handled in the public sector vs the private. In the private sector, pensions don't exist and pay scales are up to the whims of senior management, with it usually being the case that new hires come in at higher rates than existing employees, so there can be a lot of advantages to job hopping every couple years. OTOH, in the public sector, pensions are a big deal, pay scales are typically legislated and/or bargained and, along with advancement opportunities, are influenced by years of service in the organization. When a job hop resets the clock on your pension and raises, there can be a pretty strong incentive to stay put.

One of those two articles also said that the FBI requires new hires to relocate, which may not be a big deal for young recruits, but is going to be a bigger deterrent for someone a bit older.

RDKirk said:

That has nothing to do with

What did they teach you in school , flat or round earth?​

Click to expand...

Well, since you pipe into my conversation with the other poster, I'll answer your question. I was taught a global Earth (spherical). This was during the years 1960-1972. I didn't hear that any modern people believed in a flat world until I heard of "The Flat Earth Society" around 1980. I thought it ridiculous that anyone would believe in a flat earth until I learned about conspiracy theories and urban legends. Then I understood.

But regarding my previous response, I thought it was relevant because I was pointing out that the flat earth theory has been around since pre-history.

I will try a different tact. In my well-traveled life, I have found spots in the world where I do not fit in. I mean it can be a like a desert. In one place it can really be rough, in another I can flourish. Sometimes too I think that God allows one to be uncomfortable to get them to move. Just not as extreme as Jonah.
I don't condemn your lack of church involvement but you were created not just to get something out of fellowship but even more importantly to find somewhere that you can give. So whether it is a new town or your fellowship in church, I would try some new things especially with the leading of the Holy Spirit in mind. I pray you can find God's will and in it the path for more engagement with others. God bless!

Aldebaran said:

That doesn't answer the question I asked you about why we don't just hire more police since they are so effective.

Click to expand...

The police can't always be depended on when every second matters. Sometimes the response time to arrive at the scene can take several minutes; a few may hide like the resource officer at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, and other times they might stand around and do nothing like what we saw in Uvalde. The example at the link I shared was the best-case scenario. Police were literally on the scene and able to respond within seconds, and dozens of people still ended up being shot. Had the shooter been armed with a gun with a ten-round magazine or even multiple ten-round magazines, rather than an assault-style weapon with a 100-round magazine, the number of casualties would have been much lower.

Aldebaran said:

News reports say the shooting lasted 2 minutes. What were the police doing the other 1 minute and 40 seconds?
Also, it was 2 people killed, not 9.

Click to expand...

The linked story that you responded to was a shooting that took place in Dayton, not this most recent shooting.

JosephZ said:

Certain types of guns are part of the problem.

Dayton Shooting Lasted Just 32 Seconds and Left 9 Dead.​

It was just 32 seconds from the first shot to the last shot. In that time, a 24-year-old gunman with an AR-15-style assault rifle and a 100-round drum magazine was able to kill nine people and wound 27 others on a crowded street in Dayton, Ohio early Sunday.

In that time, six Dayton police officers were able to respond and open fire, killing the shooter as he tried to enter a packed bar.

Click to expand...

ThatRobGuy said:

That's why we desperately need to find a compromise that will satisfy the concerns of both parties.

If I may be a broken record...

Gun law in the Czech Republic - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I feel like this is the way

The Czech Republic has some pretty robust gun rights for purposes of self-defense, and they also can boast some of the lowest murder rates in Europe. That has to be the "best of both worlds" outcome for anyone looking at it objectively, correct?

They have a homicide rate of 0.7 (on par with the Nordic countries), Prague is one of the safest capital cities in the EU, and people like myself can still carry a firearm for self-defense.


Obviously what we have right now isn't working... our homicide rates stand out among other developed countries.

However, I'm also very sympathetic to the concept of "I, as a law abiding citizen, shouldn't ever have to be left a position of being at a disadvantage to a criminal who either wishes to hurt me, or take my stuff, and kowtow to them and tuck my tail and hand over my wallet"


If anyone would outright reject the Czech Republic model (given their legal framework, and their impressive results), then I have to think this isn't an "outcome based" debate, and is more rooted in "can't let the other side be right about anything or give them an inch".


If the only two proposals being presented are
"I should be able to buy a Tommy Gun at Walmart with no more difficulty involved than buying a gallon of milk"
vs.
"Nobody should be able to have a gun for any reason besides hunting"

Then I don't think either of those two positions are actually taking it seriously... and are likely just appealing to whatever stats and incidents that allows them to bolters their personal position.

Click to expand...

The Czech laws seem to be reasonable ones. Anyone can own a gun if they are licensed. I would be concerned in this country that the left would really restrict these licenses. Only allowing certain people to carry them becauae they ha e to prove a specific reason to carry like being under threat or some such thing. Or not being allowed to carry because you are a right wing conservative or MAGA.

If we could actually get an agreement that ANYONE can carry as long as they can pass a proficiency exam and aren't diagnosed with a mental illness or have a criminal conviction I might consider this a good idea.

Praying that you find inner peace and a tranquil heart.

Be anxious for nothing, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Philippians 4:6-7

FutureAndAHope said:

I have uploaded two songs I wrote, and then modified with the help of AI, which one do you like the best.


I initially wrote:

LORD you are Faithful,
* * * *
yes, you will stay
* * * *


You give us hope,
* * * *

let's continue to pray
* * * *


While we seek you,

* * * *

we will truely find
* * * *



No leaving us behind

* * * *

Just is our God
* * * *

He will us forgive

* * * *

He does not abandon
* * * *

those who now live
* * * *

He offers abiding hope

* * * *

Grace to overcome life,
* * * *

to more than cope
* * * *

We should not sin,
* * * *
Grieving His Spirit within
* * * *
But if we do,
* * * *
He advocates for you
* * * *

Reach Him this day
* * * *
Love He will display
* * * *

AI then modified it to:

[Verse 1]
LORD, You are faithful, yes, You will stay
You give us hope, let's continue to pray
While we seek You, we will find
Never leaving us behind

[Pre-Chorus]
Just is our God, He will forgive
He does not abandon those who now live

[Chorus] (Rock energy, strong guitar riffs)
He offers true hope, so we can cope
We lift our hearts, in You we find hope
Though we may sin, grieving Your Spirit within
You advocate for us, Your love will always win

[Verse 2]
Reach Him this day, His love on display
Guiding our steps, lighting our way
Through trials and pain, through night and rain
Your faithfulness, LORD, will always remain

[Pre-Chorus]
Just is our God, He will forgive
He does not abandon those who now live

[Chorus]
He offers true hope, so we can cope
We lift our hearts, in You we find hope
Though we may sin, grieving Your Spirit within
You advocate for us, Your love will always win

[Bridge] (Optional rock breakdown, slower, emotional)
Even in the shadow, You are there
Holding us close, in every prayer
We will not fear, for You are near
Faithful Lord, forever here

[Chorus / Outro – Full power]
He offers true hope, so we can cope
We lift our hearts, in You we find hope
Though we may sin, grieving Your Spirit within
You advocate for us, Your love will always win

Login to view embedded media
Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

I like them both. Surprisingly, probably the Hip hop version of the first one. Vocals were so clean is what made the difference. I think you are quite talented.