Military Deployed #STOPTHECARAVAN
The military has been deployed to deal with the onslaught of invaders that are making their way to the southern border. I'm glad we have a President who will not stand for this invasion!
Comments
-
@reformed said:
The military has been deployed to deal with the onslaught of invaders that are making their way to the southern border. I'm glad we have a President who will not stand for this invasion!The report to which you linked includes a tweet from a FoxNews reporter which reads... (emphasis added)
"UPDATE: At least 800 U.S. military active-duty forces expected to deploy to southern border, troops largely engineers, doctors and lawyers: U.S. official"
So you're "glad we have a president who will" send engineers, doctors, and lawyers to the border because he "will not stand for this invasion." You offer a bold view about what is surely a bold and game-changing initiative on the part of the administration. One toe in the Rio Grande, and those Honduran and Guatemalan refugees will be engineered, medicated, and litigated back to the desperation and oppression from which they sought escape. SOMEBODY say "Amen!"
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
The military has been deployed to deal with the onslaught of invaders that are making their way to the southern border. I'm glad we have a President who will not stand for this invasion!The report to which you linked includes a tweet from a FoxNews reporter which reads... (emphasis added)
"UPDATE: At least 800 U.S. military active-duty forces expected to deploy to southern border, troops largely engineers, doctors and lawyers: U.S. official"
So you're "glad we have a president who will" send engineers, doctors, and lawyers to the border because he "will not stand for this invasion." You offer a bold view about what is surely a bold and game-changing initiative on the part of the administration. One toe in the Rio Grande, and those Honduran and Guatemalan refugees will be engineered, medicated, and litigated back to the desperation and oppression from which they sought escape. SOMEBODY say "Amen!"
Bill we don't know the details yet. And let's see:
Engineers to build structures to keep the invasion out.
Doctors to treat people who are injured.
Lawyers to quickly process them out of the country.They aren't seeking escape out of desperation and oppression. Here's how I know that is a bunch of crap. Have you seen the pictures?
If people are truly fleeing for their lives to this country, why are they carrying the flags of their country? If they hate their country so much and it is so bad, why are they flying the flags of those countries? That makes no sense.
This is an invasion. It's an army, it's a mob. Honestly, if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot.
-
@reformed said:
Bill we don't know the details yet. And let's see:Yet the title you chose for this thread - "Military Deployed #STOPTHECARAVAN" - sure suggests details different from the reality reported in the FoxNews reporter's tweet. "Military deployed" gives images of infantry and paratroopers in combat dress. But the reality is they're sending some lawyers, doctors, and engineers.
Engineers to build structures to keep the invasion out.
You say "we don't know the details yet." How then do you know that the engineers are going to "build structures to keep the invasion out"?
Lawyers to quickly process them out of the country.
You say "we don't know the details yet." How then do you know that the lawyers are going to "quickly process them out of the country"?
They aren't seeking escape out of desperation and oppression. Here's how I know that is a bunch of crap. Have you seen the pictures?
If people are truly fleeing for their lives to this country, why are they carrying the flags of their country? If they hate their country so much and it is so bad, why are they flying the flags of those countries? That makes no sense.
What leads you to conclude those political refugees "hate their countr(ies)"? To my knowledge, most political refugees love their countries, but their countries' leaders and/or political instability and oppression make fleeing for sanctuary a preferred option. What evidence do you have that those folks hate their countries?
This is an invasion. It's an army, it's a mob. Honestly, if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot.
I don't doubt that you would shoot them on the spot.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
Bill we don't know the details yet. And let's see:Yet the title you chose for this thread - "Military Deployed #STOPTHECARAVAN" - sure suggests details different from the reality reported in the FoxNews reporter's tweet. "Military deployed" gives images of infantry and paratroopers in combat dress. But the reality is they're sending some lawyers, doctors, and engineers.
Largely is what it says, it doesn't say only. Even then, we don't know what exactly is being sent yet.
Engineers to build structures to keep the invasion out.
You say "we don't know the details yet." How then do you know that the engineers are going to "build structures to keep the invasion out"?
I'm saying what the engineers could be used for Bill. Surely you are smart enough to understand that.
Lawyers to quickly process them out of the country.
You say "we don't know the details yet." How then do you know that the lawyers are going to "quickly process them out of the country"?
See above.
They aren't seeking escape out of desperation and oppression. Here's how I know that is a bunch of crap. Have you seen the pictures?
If people are truly fleeing for their lives to this country, why are they carrying the flags of their country? If they hate their country so much and it is so bad, why are they flying the flags of those countries? That makes no sense.
What leads you to conclude those political refugees "hate their countr(ies)"? To my knowledge, most political refugees love their countries, but their countries' leaders and/or political instability and oppression make fleeing for sanctuary a preferred option. What evidence do you have that those folks hate their countries?
Why would they be carrying their flags with them and waving them proudly while coming to America? That makes NO sense Bill.
This is an invasion. It's an army, it's a mob. Honestly, if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot.
I don't doubt that you would shoot them on the spot.
Would you shoot an intruder to your house?
-
@reformed said:
I'm saying what the engineers could be used for Bill. Surely you are smart enough to understand that.I don't see the value or appropriateness of discussing whether either of us is "smart enough" to understand our discussion. It doesn't surprise me that you do.
See above.
See above.
Why would they be carrying their flags with them and waving them proudly while coming to America? That makes NO sense Bill.
How many times in your life have you been a political refugee? On those occasions, did you carry your flag with you? In on the off chance you've never been a refugee, how many refugees have you met and spoken with personally for long enough to get to them, their intentions, and their attitudes toward their home nation flags?
I don't doubt that you would shoot them on the spot.
Would you shoot an intruder to your house?
No. I don't and expect never to own a gun.
More broadly, someone seeking asylum at our nation's southern border is FAR, FAR, FAR different from someone breaking into my or your personal residence. The US is our home country. It is not our personal residence.
-
@reformed said:
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
The military has been deployed to deal with the onslaught of invaders that are making their way to the southern border. I'm glad we have a President who will not stand for this invasion!The report to which you linked includes a tweet from a FoxNews reporter which reads... (emphasis added)
"UPDATE: At least 800 U.S. military active-duty forces expected to deploy to southern border, troops largely engineers, doctors and lawyers: U.S. official"
fear, fear, fear! Just a political Show! Shame! v
So you're "glad we have a president who will" send engineers, doctors, and lawyers to the border because he "will not stand for this invasion." You offer a bold view about what is surely a bold and game-changing initiative on the part of the administration. One toe in the Rio Grande, and those Honduran and Guatemalan refugees will be engineered, medicated, and litigated back to the desperation and oppression from which they sought escape. SOMEBODY say "Amen!"
Bill we don't know the details yet. And let's see:
Engineers to build structures to keep the invasion out.
Doctors to treat people who are injured.
Lawyers to quickly process them out of the country.A waste of the American's taxes.
They aren't seeking escape out of desperation and oppression. Here's how I know that is a bunch of crap. Have you seen the pictures?
If people are truly fleeing for their lives to this country, why are they carrying the flags of their country? If they hate their country so much and it is so bad, why are they flying the flags of those countries? That makes no sense.
This is an invasion. It's an army, it's a mob. Honestly, if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot.
Hear yourself. You're out of control! Needless fair!
"... if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot".
"shoot on spot"? A born-again right-to-lifer suggesting taking lives in mass, what has gotten into you? Are you ashamed of your or were being hypocritical loving life. Is this the attitude and the behavior of a Christian? You seriously need to see a doctor. "Thy shall not kill (Murder)". I didn't know it was the death penalty entering America illegally. WWJD? CM
-
@Bill_Coley they are in fact infantry deploying with weapons.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2018/10/29/dod-presser-4-pm-n2533039
-
@C_M_ said:
@reformed said:
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
The military has been deployed to deal with the onslaught of invaders that are making their way to the southern border. I'm glad we have a President who will not stand for this invasion!The report to which you linked includes a tweet from a FoxNews reporter which reads... (emphasis added)
"UPDATE: At least 800 U.S. military active-duty forces expected to deploy to southern border, troops largely engineers, doctors and lawyers: U.S. official"
fear, fear, fear! Just a political Show! Shame!
Are you insane?
vSo you're "glad we have a president who will" send engineers, doctors, and lawyers to the border because he "will not stand for this invasion." You offer a bold view about what is surely a bold and game-changing initiative on the part of the administration. One toe in the Rio Grande, and those Honduran and Guatemalan refugees will be engineered, medicated, and litigated back to the desperation and oppression from which they sought escape. SOMEBODY say "Amen!"
Bill we don't know the details yet. And let's see:
Engineers to build structures to keep the invasion out.
Doctors to treat people who are injured.
Lawyers to quickly process them out of the country.A waste of the American's taxes.
Protecting the country is a waste of taxes?
They aren't seeking escape out of desperation and oppression. Here's how I know that is a bunch of crap. Have you seen the pictures?
If people are truly fleeing for their lives to this country, why are they carrying the flags of their country? If they hate their country so much and it is so bad, why are they flying the flags of those countries? That makes no sense.
This is an invasion. It's an army, it's a mob. Honestly, if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot.
Hear yourself. You're out of control! Needless fair!
Needless fair?
"... if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot".
"shoot on spot"? A born-again right-to-lifer suggesting taking lives in mass, what has gotten into you? Are you ashamed of your or were being hypocritical loving life. Is this the attitude and the behavior of a Christian? You seriously need to see a doctor. "Thy shall not kill (Murder)". I didn't know it was the death penalty entering America illegally. WWJD? CM
This is not hypocritical. And I reject your notion that I need to see a doctor, that's ridiculous and you should ashamed of your "Christian" comments toward me.
-
@reformed said:
"... if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot".
"shoot on spot"? A born-again right-to-lifer suggesting taking lives in mass, what has gotten into you? Are you ashamed of your or were being hypocritical loving life. Is this the attitude and the behavior of a Christian? You seriously need to see a doctor. "Thy shall not kill (Murder)". I didn't know it was the death penalty entering America illegally. WWJD? CM
This is not hypocritical. And I reject your notion that I need to see a doctor, that's ridiculous and you should ashamed of your "Christian" comments toward me.
Do you stand behind your own words? Are you willing to repudiate your words below:
@reformed said: "... if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot".
This is NOT Christian! This is not of Christ. Nothing you say will change this.
Do you know what role the military will be if (or when) they get there? Their role will be limited at best ("support"). The American military can't operate in the role of a civil law enforcement officer or as a department would do? I thought you knew this. I would invite Bill (if he has the time) to please, spell this out for you if you didn't know this.
Trump sending the military down to the US Southern border is MORE THEATER than power and ability. It's a detraction, fear, and a show for the unenlightened and some of the more cultic followers of Mr. Trump.
So far, America still seems to hold to the saying that it's "a nation of laws". Unfortunately, America has reached several new lows lately. Let's hope she doesn't change this. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@reformed said:
"... if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot".
"shoot on spot"? A born-again right-to-lifer suggesting taking lives in mass, what has gotten into you? Are you ashamed of your or were being hypocritical loving life. Is this the attitude and the behavior of a Christian? You seriously need to see a doctor. "Thy shall not kill (Murder)". I didn't know it was the death penalty entering America illegally. WWJD? CM
This is not hypocritical. And I reject your notion that I need to see a doctor, that's ridiculous and you should ashamed of your "Christian" comments toward me.
Do you stand behind your own words? Are you willing to repudiate your words below:
@reformed said: "... if they set foot in the country illegally I would say we are authorized to shoot on the spot".
This is NOT Christian! This is not of Christ. Nothing you say will change this.
You probably don't believe in the death penalty either, even though Scripture demands it.
Do you know what role the military will be if (or when) they get there? Their role will be limited at best ("support"). The American military can't operate in the role of a civil law enforcement officer or as a department would do? I thought you knew this. I would invite Bill (if he has the time) to please, spell this out for you if you didn't know this.
You don't think the military's role is to defend from foreign invaders? I think you are the one that needs an education.
Trump sending the military down to the US Southern border is MORE THEATER than power and ability. It's a detraction, fear, and a show for the unenlightened and some of the more cultic followers of Mr. Trump.
No, it's practical and necessary.
So far, America still seems to hold to the saying that it's "a nation of laws". Unfortunately, America has reached several new lows lately. Let's hope she doesn't change this. CM
What lows are that?
-
@reformed said:
@Bill_Coley they are in fact infantry deploying with weapons.https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2018/10/29/dod-presser-4-pm-n2533039
The original tweet from the FoxNews reporter referenced "at least 800" military people, "largely" doctors, lawyers, and engineers. Now we hear the number is more than 5,000, and "largely" NOT doctors, lawyers, and engineers. This is sad, disgusting, shameful stuff - an embarrassment to our country and its standing in the world - all to satisfy the childish but dangerous electoral and emotional needs of our nation's president.
-
@reformed said:
This is not hypocritical. And I reject your notion that I need to see a doctor, that's ridiculous and you should ashamed of your "Christian" comments toward me.
I think CM's "see a doctor" recommendation to you was out of bounds because it violated the "criticize ideas, not people" expectation.
But I can't help but point out the delicious hypocrisy in YOUR post, reformed. You object, I think validly, to his critical comments about you personally, just three paragraphs after YOU questioned his sanity!!
@reformed said:
Are you insane?
In the name of consistency, will you now acknowledge that your question to him was "ridiculous" and that you should be "ashamed" of it?
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
@Bill_Coley they are in fact infantry deploying with weapons.https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2018/10/29/dod-presser-4-pm-n2533039
The original tweet from the FoxNews reporter referenced "at least 800" military people, "largely" doctors, lawyers, and engineers. Now we hear the number is more than 5,000, and "largely" NOT doctors, lawyers, and engineers. This is sad, disgusting, shameful stuff - an embarrassment to our country and its standing in the world - all to satisfy the childish but dangerous electoral and emotional needs of our nation's president.
How is this childish? How is this shameful?
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
This is not hypocritical. And I reject your notion that I need to see a doctor, that's ridiculous and you should ashamed of your "Christian" comments toward me.
I think CM's "see a doctor" recommendation to you was out of bounds because it violated the "criticize ideas, not people" expectation.
But I can't help but point out the delicious hypocrisy in YOUR post, reformed. You object, I think validly, to his critical comments about you personally, just three paragraphs after YOU questioned his sanity!!
@reformed said:
Are you insane?
In the name of consistency, will you now acknowledge that your question to him was "ridiculous" and that you should be "ashamed" of it?
Surely you can see the difference between the figure of speech "Are you insane?" Meaning, the idea you just shared is outrageous, and "You need to see a doctor,".....
They aren't even on the same playing field.
-
@reformed said:
You probably don't believe in the death penalty either, even though Scripture demands it.To my reading, Scripture "demands" the death penalty for several offenses, including "murder, adultery, bestiality, rape of a betrothed virgin, male-male sexual intercourse, doing work on the Sabbath, a woman who is found not to have been a virgin on the night of her wedding, worshiping other gods, witchcraft, taking the LORD's name in vain, cursing a parent, kidnapping, rebellion against parents, having a spirit of divination."
Do you believe Scripture STILL "demands" capital punishment for all of those offenses? If not, what are the specific verses that rescind the death penalty for each of the offenses for which, in your view, Scripture no longer "demands" it?
You don't think the military's role is to defend from foreign invaders? I think you are the one that needs an education.
We all know that "foreign invaders" is a term that refers to foreign persons with nefarious military and/or politic intentions; it does NOT refer to refugees who intend to seek asylum from the social, political, and economic upheaval in their home nations. If you claim the women, children, and men in the caravan have nefarious intentions, prove it.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
You probably don't believe in the death penalty either, even though Scripture demands it.To my reading, Scripture "demands" the death penalty for several offenses, including "murder, adultery, bestiality, rape of a betrothed virgin, male-male sexual intercourse, doing work on the Sabbath, a woman who is found not to have been a virgin on the night of her wedding, worshiping other gods, witchcraft, taking the LORD's name in vain, cursing a parent, kidnapping, rebellion against parents, having a spirit of divination."
Do you believe Scripture STILL "demands" capital punishment for all of those offenses? If not, what are the specific verses that rescind the death penalty for each of the offenses for which, in your view, Scripture no longer "demands" it?
You don't think the military's role is to defend from foreign invaders? I think you are the one that needs an education.
We all know that "foreign invaders" is a term that refers to foreign persons with nefarious military and/or politic intentions; it does NOT refer to refugees who intend to seek asylum from the social, political, and economic upheaval in their home nations. If you claim the women, children, and men in the caravan have nefarious intentions, prove it.
They aren't refugees. Give me a break.
-
@reformed said:
How is this childish? How is this shameful?NO American president has EVER elevated the "threat" of potential asylum seekers to a level that required an armed, brigade-sized American military presence. ONLY a president whose emotional immaturity needs an enemy to fend off in the final days before an election would resort to such outlandish, outrageous conduct. THAT'S what's childish and shameful.
Surely you can see the difference between the figure of speech "Are you insane?" Meaning, the idea you just shared is outrageous, and "You need to see a doctor,".....
How was your "Are you insane?" any more a "figure of speech" than CM's "You seriously need to see a doctor"? It's obvious to me that neither of you intended your respective epithets to be taken literally.
Even if there was some difference between the two - and I don't think there was - your question to CM clearly also violated the "criticize ideas, not people" expectation.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
How is this childish? How is this shameful?NO American president has EVER elevated the "threat" of potential asylum seekers to a level that required an armed, brigade-sized American military presence. ONLY a president whose emotional immaturity needs an enemy to fend off in the final days before an election would resort to such outlandish, outrageous conduct. THAT'S what's childish and shameful.
How many presidents have dealt with invaders in the numbers of thousands marching up to the southern border?
Surely you can see the difference between the figure of speech "Are you insane?" Meaning, the idea you just shared is outrageous, and "You need to see a doctor,".....
How was your "Are you insane?" any more a "figure of speech" than CM's "You seriously need to see a doctor"? It's obvious to me that neither of you intended your respective epithets to be taken literally.
Even if there was some difference between the two - and I don't think there was - your question to CM clearly also violated the "criticize ideas, not people" expectation.
Right, your favorite thing to harp on that you break regularly.
-
@reformed said:
They aren't refugees. Give me a break.
Prove it.
And I have to note that you didn't respond to the first question of my previous post, so I'll re-post it here:
- To my reading, Scripture "demands" the death penalty for several offenses, including "murder, adultery, bestiality, rape of a betrothed virgin, male-male sexual intercourse, doing work on the Sabbath, a woman who is found not to have been a virgin on the night of her wedding, worshiping other gods, witchcraft, taking the LORD's name in vain, cursing a parent, kidnapping, rebellion against parents, having a spirit of divination."
- Do you believe Scripture STILL "demands" capital punishment for all of those offenses? If not, what are the specific verses that rescind the death penalty for each of the offenses for which, in your view, Scripture no longer "demands" it?
And speaking of questions you haven't responded to: In THIS THREAD, I have asked you FOUR TIMES for links to the specific pages on the fbi.gov website that you believe back up your claim that "gun violence is less prevalent in places that have FEWER gun restrictions." And FOUR TIMES you have not responded.
In THIS POST, you told CM that he "had better be able to back up" what you called his "charge." And in THIS POST, you told Dave L he needed to "prove (his) point." Surely you hold yourself to the same standard: That you "better be able to back up" - to "prove" - your claim that "gun violence is less prevalent in places that have FEWER gun restrictions." So FOR THE FIFTH TIME, I ask you to provide links to the specific pages in the fbi website that in your view support your claim about gun violence (and to do so in the appropriate thread, of course).
-
Look up the definition of a refugee. That's all the proof you need.
And I have to note that you didn't respond to the first question of my previous post, so I'll re-post it here:
- To my reading, Scripture "demands" the death penalty for several offenses, including "murder, adultery, bestiality, rape of a betrothed virgin, male-male sexual intercourse, doing work on the Sabbath, a woman who is found not to have been a virgin on the night of her wedding, worshiping other gods, witchcraft, taking the LORD's name in vain, cursing a parent, kidnapping, rebellion against parents, having a spirit of divination."
- Do you believe Scripture STILL "demands" capital punishment for all of those offenses? If not, what are the specific verses that rescind the death penalty for each of the offenses for which, in your view, Scripture no longer "demands" it?
No not all of those still demand the death penalty.
And speaking of questions you haven't responded to: In THIS THREAD, I have asked you FOUR TIMES for links to the specific pages on the fbi.gov website that you believe back up your claim that "gun violence is less prevalent in places that have FEWER gun restrictions." And FOUR TIMES you have not responded.
I gave you the link Bill.
In THIS POST, you told CM that he "had better be able to back up" what you called his "charge." And in THIS POST, you told Dave L he needed to "prove (his) point." Surely you hold yourself to the same standard: That you "better be able to back up" - to "prove" - your claim that "gun violence is less prevalent in places that have FEWER gun restrictions." So FOR THE FIFTH TIME, I ask you to provide links to the specific pages in the fbi website that in your view support your claim about gun violence (and to do so in the appropriate thread, of course).
I gave you the link, and you are off-topic.
-
@reformed said:
Look up the definition of a refugee. That's all the proof you need.I looked up the definition. Prove that the women, children, and men of the "caravan" don't fit it.
No not all of those still demand the death penalty.
Which ones no longer "demand the death penalty"? What verse(s) rescind the death penalty for those that no longer "demand" it?
I gave you the link, and you are off-topic.
So please follow me HERE.
-
@reformed said:
Right, your favorite thing to harp on that you break regularly.
As we have learned countless times from our president's example, the repetition of false statements does not make them true.
I do not "regularly" break the "criticize ideas, not people" expectation. I have broken it, yes - in one instance, glaringly, as I acknowledged in a post - but rarely, if ever, otherwise. Disagree? Prove it. In the words you posted to CM, "That's a pretty big charge you just laid against me, you BETTER be able to back it up."
And while you're at it, provide links to the specific pages in the fbi.gov website that prove your claim that "gun violence is less prevalent in places that have FEWER gun restrictions."
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
Right, your favorite thing to harp on that you break regularly.
As we have learned countless times from our president's example, the repetition of false statements does not make them true.
I do not "regularly" break the "criticize ideas, not people" expectation. I have broken it, yes - in one instance, glaringly, as I acknowledged in a post - but rarely, if ever, otherwise. Disagree? Prove it. In the words you posted to CM, "That's a pretty big charge you just laid against me, you BETTER be able to back it up."
And while you're at it, provide links to the specific pages in the fbi.gov website that prove your claim that "gun violence is less prevalent in places that have FEWER gun restrictions."
We have actually proven it in multiple threads. You are in denial. But any objective person sees right through the snake.
-
@reformed said:
We have actually proven it in multiple threads. You are in denial. But any objective person sees right through the snake.
As I noted in my previous post, the repetition of false statements does not make them true.
I'm not "in denial." I'm "in search of" evidence that supports your oft-repeated, but never proven, claim. I'd ask for links to some of the "multiple threads" in which your statement has been "proven," but I know from my seven requests for links to specific pages in the fbi.gov site that when held to account for the false statements you post, you make no effort to prove them - in fact, the most common outcome is that you fail even to mention the posts that challenge you to back up your false statements.
And can I provide support to MY claim? Why, yes. Here are links to five posts in which I asked for your response to my question(s) or other requests for a fourth time, because you did not respond to the first three requests:
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/10594/#Comment_10594
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/10176/#Comment_10176
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/7589/#Comment_7589
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/6727/#Comment_6727
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/5309/#Comment_5309"...sees right through the snake" : A creative, if also awkward and obscure, turn of phrase.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@reformed said:
We have actually proven it in multiple threads. You are in denial. But any objective person sees right through the snake.
As I noted in my previous post, the repetition of false statements does not make them true.
I'm not "in denial." I'm "in search of" evidence that supports your oft-repeated, but never proven, claim. I'd ask for links to some of the "multiple threads" in which your statement has been "proven," but I know from my seven requests for links to specific pages in the fbi.gov site that when held to account for the false statements you post, you make no effort to prove them - in fact, the most common outcome is that you fail even to mention the posts that challenge you to back up your false statements.
And can I provide support to MY claim? Why, yes. Here are links to five posts in which I asked for your response to my question(s) or other requests for a fourth time, because you did not respond to the first three requests:
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/10594/#Comment_10594
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/10176/#Comment_10176
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/7589/#Comment_7589
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/6727/#Comment_6727
https://christiandiscourse.net/discussion/comment/5309/#Comment_5309"...sees right through the snake" : A creative, if also awkward and obscure, turn of phrase.
Bill you are the snake, a deceiver, a wolf, false prophet, antagonist, antichrist, and more.
-
Reformed, I am concern that you're losing it. Why do you speak to Bill, this way? The sky is not falling. Be at peace. CM
-
@reformed said:
Bill you are the snake, a deceiver, a wolf, false prophet, antagonist, antichrist, and more.
Thanks for the description, reformed. What with all the roles I play - husband, step father, grandpa, pastor, friend, et al - I've wavered a bit in my commitment to the ones you point out, especially the "snake," "wolf," and "antichrist" roles. I'll do better. It'll be my New Year's resolution!
Perhaps YOUR New Year's resolution will be to post links to the specific pages on the fbi.gov website that support your claim that "gun violence is less prevalent in places that have FEWER gun restrictions."... Or not.
I think it's time for us to face reality: I'm a "snake, a deceiver, a wolf, false prophet, antagonist, antichrist, and more," and you're not going to provide links to specific pages on the fbi.gov website. I guess we each have our crosses to bear, don't we? My cross comes from my being an incarnation of evil, obviously. Your cross comes from the fact that your claim was and remains false.
I'm guessing you made the claim in a sincere belief that it was true, but without conducting any research to confirm your conclusion. Therefore, when I asked you for supporting evidence, you had nothing to turn to. So you threw out a couple of portal sites, hoping they would satisfy my curiosity. When they didn't - in part because the data I had mined from the fbi site made a strong case that your claim was false! - you returned to the "run silent, run deep" strategy you have employed so often when I presented you with questions, facts, and arguments that showed the profound weakness of your views. Perhaps if you just ignore my questions and comments, they'll go away, and no one will notice that you can't answer them honestly without acknowledging the failure of your arguments or the falsehood of your claims.
BOTTOM LINE: I'm a "snake, a deceiver, a wolf, false prophet, antagonist, antichrist, and more," who takes small but meaningful comfort from my practice of stating facts correctly, and you're.... somebody who thinks I'm a "snake, a deceiver, a wolf, false prophet, antagonist, antichrist, and more." [It's rather amazing, don't you think, that you had to refuse SEVEN requests that you prove your claim in order for us to get to that conclusion? I can't shake the belief that we could have started this exchange there and saved us both a bunch of posts. Live and learn.]
-
The big US Military can't stop a group of harmless mothers and children. The only thing they can do is put up barbwire. They must have no contact with the migrants. Trump is shaming the military. They're becoming a "Paper Tiger". CM
-
@Bill_Coley said:
We all know that "foreign invaders" is a term that refers to foreign persons with nefarious military and/or politic intentions; it does NOT refer to refugees who intend to seek asylum from the social, political, and economic upheaval in their home nations.I know - with some practical experience over the last 3 years - that fake refugees in a very real sense fit the term "foreign invaders" in a sense that is NOT AT ALL about "neforious military and political intentions".
The point of distinction is that these crowds / multitudes are NOT real refugees seeking asylum from upheaval in their country ... because seeking such asylum would mean that it is very temporary and they would get on their way home the moment the upheaval is overcome and their country needs re-building.
We have VERY large numbers of "fake refugees" who are young single males who have entered the country and are exploiting out social help systems to the max and who have no intention to go back to their countries ... Syria has for some time already been liberated from the ISIS and many real Syrian refugees who fled to Lebanon, Jordan, are now returning to Syria to rebuild and live again in their country. Those hundreds of thousands "Syrian refugees" here in Germany have no intention of going back to their country ... their intentions are obviously to "establish little Syria" over here in Germany (by that I mean, they also have no intention of integrating themselves really into our language, lifestyle and culture ... and rather demand that their "middle age standards" become the norm for all. This country has been invaded by foreigners (many of them with false identities, quite a number of them former ISIS terrorists fighters) and the invasion has already been effective to the point that many German women no longer dare to go out by themselves for danger of being sexually harassed or raped, stabbed with a knife and killed (plenty of such has already happened)
If you claim the women, children, and men in the caravan have nefarious intentions, prove it.
See above ... the intentions are not necessarily about "military intentions" ...
But then, perhaps the USA is quite different from Germany in terms of having a many century long culture, etc. and doesn't therefore care about a "cultural" identity which may be lost to a foreign culture that is not at all compatible with what has existed for many hundreds of years and is "given away" by the likes of our current "globalist political dictators á la Merkel.
-
@C_M_ said:
The big US Military can't stop a group of harmless mothers and children. The only thing they can do is put up barbwire. They must have no contact with the migrants. Trump is shaming the military. They're becoming a "Paper Tiger". CMThe reason for that is not Trump, but those powers behind the scenes with their liberal, destructive, globalist agendas who are pushing this whole movement (anyone heard the name "Soros" in this connection?), perhaps in order to "topple Trump", because he is not as quick as they would like in pushing their agenda.
Why are those "harmless" folks climbing walls and trying to enter the USA illegally? IF they were real refugees why would they want to apply for asylum with a illegal first step that would immediately be cause for their application being revoked???
-
@Wolfgang said:
@C_M_ said:
The big US Military can't stop a group of harmless mothers and children. The only thing they can do is put up barbwire. They must have no contact with the migrants. Trump is shaming the military. They're becoming a "Paper Tiger". CMThe reason for that is not Trump, but those powers behind the scenes with their liberal, destructive, globalist agendas who are pushing this whole movement (anyone heard the name "Soros" in this connection?), perhaps in order to "topple Trump", because he is not as quick as they would like in pushing their agenda.
Why are those "harmless" folks climbing walls and trying to enter the USA illegally? IF they were real refugees why would they want to apply for asylum with a illegal first step that would immediately be cause for their application being revoked???
Or the bigger issue, what exactly are they applying for asylum from? The interviews I have seen/heard they say they want a better life, more opportunity. THAT'S NOT ASYLUM.
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)