essentialsaltes said:

Man Faces Felony Charges After Subway Attack on Federal Officer in DC​

A 37-year-old man hurled a Subway sandwich at a federal agent in the nation's capital. A video of the incident has gone viral, in which the man can be seen standing along with agents and suddenly whips his deli sandwich at one of them in the chest.

Click to expand...

Not only a DC resident but a now former DOJ employee.

boughtwithaprice said:

Given that Our Lord said a house divided against itself cannot stand, and Satan does not cast out Satan, what are your best arguments against the Catholic Church? What basis would you use to call the Catholic Church evil, assuming that you do so?

Click to expand...

I study semantics particular to psycholinguistics. It's how I discern Spirit. The term "Semantics" denotes the sentiments behind the words people use, and the term "psycholinguistics" pertains to the differing nuances in the meanings that individual words can carry in our thoughts and subsequently whether they are objective or subjective applications.

I can tell you that words have power and that lies usurp from the truth, wherefore what we believe to be true will manifest a spirit/emotion and move us accordingly. With that in mind I can say with all certainty that any reasoning based on something false, but believed to be true, will end in a contradiction.

As you have indicated above, the spiritual enemy is the spirit of the devil, or accuser/slanderer. The spirit that scatters the sheep works against the Spirit that gathers the sheep.

The term The "Church", objectively implies a unity of individuals through the Holy Spirit of Truth WHO inwardly convicts us of sin and testifies to God The Father and His son "The Christ", which in turn denotes a positive connotation of "church" even because the church are those led by The Holy Spirit. The term 'catholic' means 'universal', by definition the church all over the world. Therefore, I would never entertain any sentiment/spirit suggesting that the Universal Church around the world could ever be evil, because any such reasoning will ultimately end in a contradiction.

However it would be a mistake, and even misleading to apply the term "catholic/universal" as a 'label' particularly if meant to introduce a false premise. For example, if I joined a gathering labeled the "good guys" club, it wouldn't make me a "good guy" because it's just a label, nor would it make all those who are NOT members, bad guys. I'm saying that I can inadvertently use "Catholic" as a label simply because I say, "I'm Catholic", and the sentiment could then suggest to others who are not "Catholics" , that they are not in the universal church led by the Holy Spirit. Likewise, I would not presume that one must be led by Peter. I therefore understand the communion of the saints as a communion in Christ's blood shed on his cross, even because the sacred thing of the sacrament is to me his loving sacrifice wherein he suffered so much, for me.

​

1 Corinthians 3​

​

New American Standard Bible​

​

​

2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to consume it. But even now you are not yet able, 3 for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like ordinary people? 4 For when one person says, “I am [a]with Paul,” and another, “I am [b]with Apollos,” are you not ordinary people?​

​

5 What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one. 6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. 7 So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth. 8 Now the one who plants and the one who waters are one; but each will receive his own [c]reward according to his own labor. 9 For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s [d]field, God’s building.​

​

10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each person must be careful how he builds on it. 11 For no one can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 12 Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, 13 each one’s work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test [e]the quality of each one’s work. 14 If anyone’s work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet only so as through fire.​

GodDoesListen55 said:

I cannot believe I actually told my former pastor everything; I am kind of nervous now.

Click to expand...

No reason to be nervous. They are there to help you

GoldenBoy89 said:

I thought it was the illegal immigrants keeping you down. Now it’s independent women who are the problem?

Who ever will you scapegoat next?

Click to expand...

No. I dont entirely blame feminism, but weak men who abdicated their authority and responsibilities, failing to lead their homes, abandoning their children physically and emotionally. There are literally entire generations of adult children who do not know what it means to be a man because they were never shown. Modern feminism is a product of women nolonger feeling safe, valued, and cared for in the home. Feminist dont trust men because men failed to follow the biblical instructions given to them.

Ephesians 5:25-31 NIV
[25] Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her [26] to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, [27] and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. [28] In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. [29] After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— [30] for we are members of his body. [31] “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”

Furthermore, the balance of love and respect has spiraled out of control.

Ephesians 5:33 NIV
[33] However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

When a woman doesnt feel loved, it is hard for them to show respect. When a man isn't respected, it is hard for them to show love. Feminism doesnt respect men which is why they are not loved by men and often find themselves alone and bitter.

rambot said:

I'm tired of cowtowing to "people".

Click to expand...

You aren't cowtowing to anyone. You live in Canada. Whats going in in DC has no effect on your life whatsoever. But the people in DC will appreciate it as their city becomes cleaner and safer. So will those who wish to visit or live there in the future if this is done right.

Vanellus said:

Despite your claim of being from academia you clearly don't understand the difference between fact and opinion.

It is stupid to think a Youtube video cannot present facts

Still being coy aren't you. Which university would that be?

Still being very coy about your sources. This removes your credibility. Goodbye.

Click to expand...

Why can‘t you answer my whole post? It seems disingenuous that your reply to my post ignores my context.

Benaiah468 said:

South Africa has been rebuffed for a reason that is as “simple as it is important: South Africa could not plausibly substantiate its claim that Israel's military operation was motivated by genocidal intentions.” But that would be the only reason for the court to deal with Israel's actions at all.

Click to expand...

Who is being quoted? A dissenting judge? The majority declared that South Africa's allegations were indeed plausible, and therefore the court does have a reason to act.

The Barbarian said:

So now you've abandoned reason and are trying to argue by assertion. Which is a sufficient admission for now.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are talking about.

rambot said:

Because it can be done then logically it should hey?

Click to expand...

Under the circumstances, yes.

rambot said:

At no point in the 60s 70s 80s or 90s when dc was in A far rougher spot than it is now. Didn't need to happen then.

Click to expand...

It most certainly did. Just because it wasn't doesn't mean it should not have.

rambot said:

Bur now that there has been a steady DECREASE in crime over 2 decades then it needs to happen.

Click to expand...

Yes. A decrease in crime isn't relative. Dropping from beating your wife from 10 times a day to 6, doesn't mean things are great and nothing more needs to be done.

rambot said:

People are sick of crime ALL OVER THE US. T
They're sick of crime in houston; they're sick of crime in Miami. Why does Trump and DC get that protection?

Click to expand...

I think the answer has been provide ad nauseum. I'll try one last time. DC governance is different than those other cities. The feds have no authority over those cities. I suppose if one of those cities asked then the feds could help them, but im not sure. DC however is not the same. The president can declare an emergency there for a short period of time and the feds can assist local LE. Congress can authorize further action. That cant be done anywhere else.

rambot said:

And why did he HAVE TO copy Hitler? It's not fair that he copies Hitler playback and if it gets pointed out it's just a Godwin.

Click to expand...

Lol,

rambot said:

So? If this was about safety a way could be found....

Click to expand...

Could it? How?

We can provide the lawful circumstances for DC. But not for other places. Oh I see, so because Trump used lawful methods in DC he can use unlawful methods other places?

Apple Sky said:

Why not ?

Click to expand...

Because it doesn’t have the effect that you think. For one, all Apollo crews were 3 astronauts not 6. Secondly, you have no clue who they are.

Hentenza said:

So why did you post it?

Click to expand...

Why not ?

Clare73 said:

Doesn't make sense to your mindset. . .

Click to expand...

No, just logically. I'm not sure what mindset you're talking about.

Strong in Him said:

We can't rely on how things seem to you or the thoughts in your mind, because you change your mind.

Click to expand...

One thing you can rely on me for is the the truth.

According to the unanimous reports and statements, the matter is clear: the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague has issued a legally binding order to Israel to immediately cease its military offensive against Hamas. At any rate, this is how the ICJ's order is being reported across the board. However, as with the ICJ's first order for immediate measures in the case brought by South Africa against Israel for alleged violations of the so-called Genocide Convention at the end of January, the court actually decided something different from what everyone is claiming.

There is indeed talk of a halt, but, as some of the judges emphasized in their declarations or dissenting opinions attached to the order, it is a conditional demand.

According to Aharon Barak, one of the two judges who voted against the order, it demands that the military operations in Rafah be halted

“only to the extent necessary to fulfill Israel's obligations under the Genocide Convention”.

Click to expand...

Conversely, this means that Israel can continue its operations in Rafah

“as long as it fulfills its obligations under the Genocide Convention”.

Click to expand...

While the wording chosen in the order is ambiguous, to read from it a blanket call for a halt to the offensive in Rafah (as is virtually universally done in the media and politics) is a misreading that limits Israel's ability to pursue its legitimate military objectives while leaving its enemies, including Hamas, free to attack without Israel being able to respond.

The bottom line is that the ICJ has called on Israel to comply with its obligations under the Genocide Convention and not to undertake any military operations that would violate these obligations. Of course, the Jewish state must and does do this without anyone having to point this out to it. The fact that the ICJ believed it had to emphasize this self-evident point is probably due to the enormous international pressure the judges are under, but is somewhat superfluous from a legal point of view.

Four times in five months, South Africa has demanded a complete end to Israel's military action in Gaza and to withdraw the Israeli army immediately, completely and unconditionally from the entire Gaza Strip'on the grounds that Israel were committing genocide. And for the fourth time, South Africa has been rebuffed for a reason that is as simple as it is important: South Africa could not plausibly substantiate its claim that Israel's military operation was motivated by genocidal intentions. But that would be the only reason for the court to deal with Israel's actions at all.

Because whatever else Israel does or does not do in its operations against Hamas is simply none of the ICJ's business. By continuing to issue orders despite the fact that South Africa has been unable to provide any evidence of Israeli genocidal intent, the court is embarking on a dangerous path: it is weakening the Genocide Convention by using (or abusing) it to arbitrate an armed conflict.

The court relies primarily on statements made by United Nations representatives on social media and on press releases from relevant organizations. But it relies on these statements and press releases without even examining what kind of evidence they are based on. This behavior of the Court is in stark contrast to its previous jurisprudence, in which it has held that United Nations reports are reliable evidence only if they have probative value and are corroborated by other credible sources, if any. In the present case, the statements and press releases have simply not been corroborated.

The ICJ thus relies substantially on unconfirmed and/or unverified United Nations assertions to arrive at its assessments, in striking contrast to its usual procedures. One should add: With his careless and irresponsible handling of claims from the ranks of the United Nations, which is notoriously one-sided and biased when it comes to Israel, he unfortunately hardly differs from the majority of the media, which constantly bases its reporting on press releases from the United Nations and other, clearly partisan actors, as if they were serious and reliable sources.

Judge Sebutinde's dissenting opinion on the ICJ's order is highly readable for several reasons. On the one hand, it explains the context of Israel's military action, which South Africa always consistently ignores in its denunciations of the Jewish state: Hamas' massacre on Oct 7, 2023, the hostages still being abducted by Hamas, the ongoing rocket fire into Israel from the Gaza Strip, and the multi-front war Israel has been engaged in since last year, stretching from Lebanon in the north to Yemen in the south:

"Israel has the right to respond to these existential threats, which are interlinked and coordinated. In doing so, Israel is expected to comply with its international obligations, including international humanitarian law. However, neither international law in general nor the Genocide Convention in particular deprive Israel of the right to take necessary and proportionate measures to defend its citizens and territory against such armed attacks on multiple fronts."

Click to expand...

On the other hand, Judge Sebutinde took the trouble to respond in detail to accusations against Israel over the humanitarian situation in Gaza, emphasizing that

“the responsibility for the suffering of the Palestinians in Gaza does not lie solely with Israel, nor is it correct to say that Israel has done nothing to alleviate that suffering”.

Click to expand...

By opening additional land routes and constructing a floating pier, the volume of aid deliveries has increased continuously in recent months. In addition, Israel has also made efforts to improve medical care, including the construction of eight field hospitals and the evacuation of thousands of Palestinians for medical treatment outside the Gaza Strip.

The judge summarized,

"War inevitably and tragically affects the lives of civilians. However, this does not make Israel's war against Hamas illegitimate or unlawful from the outset, nor does it transform it into an act of genocide."

Click to expand...

Finally, she pointed out a fact that is almost always ignored when Israel is blamed for the poor humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip or the Jewish state is even accused, as the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court did last week, of deliberately starving the people in the Gaza Strip: Not only does Hamas play a not insignificant role in the situation, but also Egypt, which controls its side of the Rafah border crossing - and has not allowed aid shipments to enter the Gaza Strip since the checkpoint was brought under control by Israel as part of its advance into Rafah.

Demanding that Israel secure the movement of goods through the Rafah crossing, as ICJ order does, without also considering Egypt's responsibility, would result in demands that are simply unfeasible.

Judge Barak has spoken a simple truth that South Africa and so many others who pillory Israel and exult in judicial prosecution of the Jewish state consistently ignore:

"The key to ending this war is not to ask the Court to intervene in this conflict by making unfounded accusations of genocide against Israel. The key to ending this war lies in the hands of Hamas. Hamas started the war and can end it by releasing the hostages and fully respecting the security of the State of Israel and its citizens."

Click to expand...

S.: mena-watch

The Barbarian said:

As you see, the deflection attempt is not about winning the next election, it's to somehow get people's attention off of what Trump and Epstein were doing together.

Click to expand...

Which I have not argued about.

The Barbarian said:

That was your deflection attempt to move away from the discussion at hand.

Click to expand...

What discussion at hand? You replied to my post with a non responsive reply. The deflection is yours.

The Barbarian said:

Trump just keeps bringing up new things to deflect our attention from it. If I was Trump, I'd just come clean about what's in those files. Assuming that they wouldn't have damaging information in them.

Click to expand...

Not my argument. Don’t care. You should charge Trump rent cause he lives in your head.

The Barbarian said:

Don't see what that has to do with Trump's attempt to deflect our attention from whatever he and Epstein were doing.

Click to expand...

Not my argument. If you wanted to discuss something other than what I posted then you should not have responded to my post.

The Barbarian said:

Just pruning away attempts to deflect from the issue at hand.

Click to expand...

Not my issue at hand.

BCP1928 said:

Sex and the City then. Personally, I've been married to a femininist for 45 years. She was working in a machine shop when I met her, she got an ag degree along the way and when she retired was managing a hog farm. Sounds to me like you've not so much got an issue with with feminists as with ditzy bourgeous boomer chicks. (and I don't blame you)

Click to expand...

The message I'm taking away from his posts is that the real ruling, power demographic are modern feminist wives with careers and kids because they fought against all the odds, the patriarchy, and the "woke crowd," to truly have it all. Maybe that's why I'm so tired all the time... Carrying the weight of society on my back. LoL

Oompa Loompa said:

I won't hold back because it is the truth. Modern feminism is selfish and hollow. Many women now find themselves in their late thirties alone and empty because they believed the lie that they should focus on themselves and worry about having a family after accomplishing everything they want to do. Although they may have a nice house, car, and well paying career, they are depressed and miserable because they have nobody to share it with. They want a husband, but cannot find one. They want kids, but the biological clock is winding down.

Woman in her 30s cries describing finally wanting kids after swearing off marriage: 'Betrayed by feminism'

A 38-year-old woman described feeling terrified after realizing she wants a family and to be married.

www.foxnews.com

Childless 38-Year-Old Woman Gets Emotional as She Realizes She's Been 'Betrayed' by Feminism

Amazing how the law of sowing and reaping shows up in so many places. Feminist values and self-centeredness reveal bleak life.

www.westernjournal.com

Why 60 years of feminism has not made women any happier

When the American Family Survey recently asked: “All things considered, has feminism benefited American families?”, only 58.6% of respondents said yes. And the people who said yes also tend to be a…

nypost.com

Click to expand...

Wow, a sample size of 1 (one) in two separate rw tabloids.

Oompa Loompa said:

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/731846

This is reality of modern feminism and why traditional biblical values work.

Click to expand...

Lols. Even this source argues against your claim. The survey is from the Mormons and more than half disagree with you.

Oompa Loompa said:

I won't hold back because it is the truth. Modern feminism is selfish and hollow. Many women now find themselves in their late thirties alone and empty because they believed the lie that they should focus on themselves and worry about having a family after accomplishing everything they want to do. Although they may have a nice house, car, and well paying career, they are depressed and miserable because they have nobody to share it with. They want a husband, but cannot find one. They want kids, but the biological clock is winding down.

Woman in her 30s cries describing finally wanting kids after swearing off marriage: 'Betrayed by feminism'

A 38-year-old woman described feeling terrified after realizing she wants a family and to be married.

www.foxnews.com

Childless 38-Year-Old Woman Gets Emotional as She Realizes She's Been 'Betrayed' by Feminism

Amazing how the law of sowing and reaping shows up in so many places. Feminist values and self-centeredness reveal bleak life.

www.westernjournal.com

Why 60 years of feminism has not made women any happier

When the American Family Survey recently asked: “All things considered, has feminism benefited American families?”, only 58.6% of respondents said yes. And the people who said yes also tend to be a…

nypost.com

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/731846

This is reality of modern feminism and why traditional biblical values work.

Click to expand...

Of the four links, two of them are about the same woman and the last one is a call for submissions on articles for the purposes of a study, not an actual statement of any findings. The third link is a tabloid.

You all also need to come together and figure out what your stance is... Is it that women are childless and lonely in their 30's, bemoaning that there are no men for them and mourning that feminism sold them short? Or is there a male loneliness epidemic where swaths of men are not able to marry because women don't want them and are self-reliant because feminism worked too well?

I won't even dive into how feminism is not "focus on yourself" and "throw yourself into a career." That's just silly.

"The Producer Price Index, a measure of prices paid to wholesalers, came in fiery hot, rising 0.9% in July — the biggest gain in three years. For context, economists expected a mere 0.2% monthly increase, following a flat reading in June."

As you see, the deflection attempt is not about winning the next election, it's to somehow get people's attention off of what Trump and Epstein were doing together.

Hentenza said:

So? What does that have to do with last year’s election and what I posted?

Click to expand...

That was your deflection attempt to move away from the discussion at hand.

Hentenza said:

What am I supposed to do with what Epstein and Trump were doing together?

Click to expand...

Trump just keeps bringing up new things to deflect our attention from it. If I was Trump, I'd just come clean about what's in those files. Assuming that they wouldn't have damaging information in them.

Hentenza said:

Is that suppose to make me choose members of the Democratic Party to win the mid term election?

Click to expand...

Don't see what that has to do with Trump's attempt to deflect our attention from whatever he and Epstein were doing.

Hentenza said:

I thought you liked cohesive arguments but you are not making one here.

Click to expand...

Just pruning away attempts to deflect from the issue at hand.