Author Topic: "Who Speaks for Islam?" -the dhimmitude of politically correct academia & Gallup  (Read 3464 times)

PeteWaldo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 4106
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Good article by Robert Satloff: "Just Like Us! Really?"
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/just-like-us-really

His article regards the pro-Islam propaganda of John L. Esposito, founding director of Georgetown University's Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, and Dalia Mogahed, executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies.

The polling was intended to create the impression that Muhammad's followers are just like everybody else in the world. And while essentially non-practicing Muslims, "hypocrites" and "renegades" may be a bit more like the rest of us, true, fundamental, orthodox, Muslims will continue to try to do, and be, just like the man they follow did and/or prescribed. Muhammad's followers are obviously the most dissimilar to Christians, because Islam is a specifically counter-gospel, antichrist, anti-religion.

The academic vainly wishes Muhammad's true followers were like non-Muslims in spite of the fact that: "Sunni Muslim terrorists committed “about 70 percent” of the 12,533 terrorist murders in the world last year, according to a report by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC)."
That's just for the year 2012 and doesn't even include Shiite terrorist murders.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm

The poor fellow vainly wishes Muhammad's true followers were like the rest of us, in spite of all of the polls by more reliable pollsters, that weren't driven by an Islam-white-washing politically correct academic dhimmi:
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm#muslim_polls

John L. Esposito wasted 6 years (as Dalia Mogahed's pet dhimmi?), polling Muslims around the world in an effort to legitimize his preposterous premise, by trying to segregate into two groups "moderate" "everyday" Muslims, from those that are in their words "politically radicalized" which folks in this forum recognize as orthodox Muslims that do as Muhammad did and commanded his followers to do just as is taught by the largest Islamic universities.

I'll defer to Robert Satloff's article:

"What gives Who Speaks for Islam? its aura of credibility is that its answers are allegedly based on hard data, not taxi-driver anecdotes from a quick visit to Cairo. The book draws on a mammoth, six-year effort to poll and interview tens of thousands of Muslims in more than 35 countries with Muslim majorities or substantial minorities. The polling sample, Esposito and Mogahed claim, represents "more than 90 percent of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims." To back up the claim, the book bears the name of the gold-standard of American polling firms, Gallup.

The answer to that all-important question, the authors say, is 7 percent. That is the percentage of Muslims who told pollsters that the attacks of September 11, 2001, were "completely" justified and who said they view the United States unfavorably -- the double-barreled litmus test devised by Esposito and Mogahed to determine who is radical and who isn't.

The authors don't actually call even these people "radicals," however; the term they use is "politically radicalized," which implies that someone else is responsible for turning these otherwise ordinary Muslims into bin Laden sympathizers. By contrast, Muslims who said the 9/11 attacks were "not justified" they term "moderates.""

So as long as a Muslim claims they believe, the murder of 3,000 innocent people was not "completely justified", we're expected to consider them "moderate"???
And how many answered that the 9-11 attackers weren't justified, not because of the innocents that were slaughtered, but because suicide is non-Islamic?
Why would they squander 6 years with a 9-11 and U.S.-centered question?
Even then they came up with a whopping 7 percent, that thought the targeting and murder of 3,000 innocent civilians was justified, which is well over a hundred million Muslims!

And majorities are irrelevant since the greatest evils that have been perpetrated upon mankind have been by reprobate murderous minorities. What western Muslim standing naked, would argue with with a true, fundamental, orthodox Muslim scholar from the Middle East cradle of Islam, armed with a beheading knife in one hand and whose orthodoxy is perfectly supported by a Quran and the Hadith in his other hand?

https://youtu.be/Ry3NzkAOo3s

Obviously, the important questions that should have been asked of Muslims around the world are non-U.S.-centered questions like:
"Do you believe that terrorism is a legitimate Islamic practice?"

Which of course should be answered unanimously with a resounding "yes", with the exception of those suffer from abject ignorance, mental incapacitation, or are lying in the way of Allah. Or are perhaps just more voluntary dhimmi dupes like the misguided academic that prepared this propaganda and Gallup for gracing it with even a shred of legitimacy, since Muhammad was a conveniently self-admitted terrorist (while Muslims must believe that his "Allah" was the terrorist and Muhammad just his hands):

Surah 8:12 I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm#terror

Or how about asking:

"Do you believe that it is Islam's mission to rule the world?"

Which of course should be greeted with a unanimous "yes". Which would also mean the end of Christianity, Judaism, Hunduism, atheism, agnosticism, etc., just as is the case in Islamic countries today. Or at best dhimmitude and tolerating Christians and Jews while bleeding them for a little while, with wholesale slaughter of the rest.



Or perhaps if they had asked:
"Do you favor sharia law?"

Since a majority of even U.S. Muslims say they would choose Islamic sharia law over our United States Constitution. After all, what's so "radical" about reduced rights for women, killing homosexuals, Hindus and atheists or cutting folks hands off for stealing?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fbXvq_ZIbw

The simple truth is that Muslims believe in the imperialistic conquest of the non-Islamic world by Islam, it's just that a majority of them are too scared or lazy or perhaps even too moral or ethical, to do as Muhammad did and called them to do, and so they let their fellow Muslims do the heavy lifting of Jihad. Muhammad had words for them as well:

Surah 2.216 fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.

ExMilitary

  • ecclesia
  • Sr. Member
  • Posts: 335
  • In the last days perilous times shall come
    • View Profile
Good article by Robert Satloff: "Just Like Us! Really?"
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/just-like-us-really

His article regards regards the pro-Islam propaganda of John L. Esposito, founding director of Georgetown University's Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, and Dalia Mogahed, executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies:

The polling was intended to create the impression that Muhammad's followers are just like everybody else in the world. And while those non-practicing Muslims, "hypocrites" and apostates may be a little more like the rest of us, true, fundamental, orthodox, Muslims will continue to try to do, and be, just like the man that taught them prescribed.

They vainly wish Muhammad's true followers were like the rest of us in spite of the fact that: "Sunni Muslim terrorists committed “about 70 percent” of the 12,533 terrorist murders in the world last year, according to a report by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC)."
That's just for the year 2012 and doesn't even include Shiite terrorist murders.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm

They wasted 6 years polling Muslims around the world in an effort to reinforce their preposterous premise, by trying to segregate into two groups "moderate" "everyday" Muslims, from those that are in their words "politically radicalized" which folks in this forum recognize to be orthodox Muslims that do as Muhammad did and commanded his followers to do as is taught by the largest Islamic universities.

I'll defer to Robert Satloff's article:

[...snip...]

Probably a favorite line of the "holier than thou" accusers (when the obvious hypocrisy of Islam is pointed out) is that Christians have committed the same sorts of atrocities in the name of God.  But, this is were we (they) err.

The Apostle John said that (paraphrased) "people who 'merely' hate their brothers are the equivalent of murderers, and we know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in them."

The point is that a religious pronoun such as Christianity or Islam is not defined by the actions of those who apply the labels to themselves; rather, it is defined by the words and actions of the founder of underlying "religion" (if you will).  As John points out, by definition, those that do not adhere to the founder by word and deed (following their examples and commands) do not follow the founder, and are; hence, not a true disciple.

What this means:

Those who murder (after claiming Christianity) are not disciples of Yeshua, no matter what they claim.  Hence, they are not Christian.

Those who do not kill -kafir that continue to spread their 'false doctrine' or refuse jizya- (after claiming Islam) are not disciples of Muhammad or adherents to Allah's decrees.  Hence, not Muslim.

The world can't see this because they've chosen to believe the lie.

ExMilitary

  • ecclesia
  • Sr. Member
  • Posts: 335
  • In the last days perilous times shall come
    • View Profile
Good article by Robert Satloff: "Just Like Us! Really?"
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/just-like-us-really

His article regards regards the pro-Islam propaganda of John L. Esposito, founding director of Georgetown University's Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, and Dalia Mogahed, executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies:

The polling was intended to create the impression that Muhammad's followers are just like everybody else in the world. And while those non-practicing Muslims, "hypocrites" and apostates may be a little more like the rest of us, true, fundamental, orthodox, Muslims will continue to try to do, and be, just like the man that taught them prescribed.

They vainly wish Muhammad's true followers were like the rest of us in spite of the fact that: "Sunni Muslim terrorists committed “about 70 percent” of the 12,533 terrorist murders in the world last year, according to a report by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC)."
That's just for the year 2012 and doesn't even include Shiite terrorist murders.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm

They wasted 6 years polling Muslims around the world in an effort to reinforce their preposterous premise, by trying to segregate into two groups "moderate" "everyday" Muslims, from those that are in their words "politically radicalized" which folks in this forum recognize to be orthodox Muslims that do as Muhammad did and commanded his followers to do as is taught by the largest Islamic universities.

I'll defer to Robert Satloff's article:

[...snip...]

Are these those peaceful Christian loving Muslims everyone is talking about.  They are the 'good guys' in Syria.  These (good) Muslims are the ones the US is supporting in fighting the evil ISIS (bad Muslims) insurgence.  These are the ones who are also fighting the evil Assad regime.  They want peace (good Muslims), that is all.

Click here to read the story

So, what is the doctrine of these (good) Muslims?

“Christians and Americans have no place among us,” shouts one man in the video. “They want to wage a crusader war to occupy Syria.”

And the video ends with the ever peaceful cry, "Allahu akbar".

Just like the rest of the world, they cannot tell the difference between a label and a disciple.  In fact, just like the rest of the world, I'll bet they don't even care: "[The world] hates me because I testify that it's deeds are evil".  These people don't hate just crusaders and false disciples, they hate the idea that God has a Son.

They hate God's salvation.

ps49

  • ecclesia
  • Full Member
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Quote
What this means:

Those who murder (after claiming Christianity) are not disciples of Yeshua, no matter what they claim.  Hence, they are not Christian.

Those who do not kill -kafir that continue to spread their 'false doctrine' or refuse jizya- (after claiming Islam) are not disciples of Muhammad or adherents to Allah's decrees.  Hence, not Muslim.

The world can't see this because they've chosen to believe the lie.

Just wondering, how likely is it that the world's political elite do not actually understand the true nature of Islam? I think it very unlikely. After all, one only has to read the Quran to grasp the underlying rationale behind the murderous ISIS etc. It might be that they have chosen to fabricate a lie in an attempt to neutralise the teachings of Muhammed. Propaganda wars are a frequent favourite of those who "know best."

ExMilitary

  • ecclesia
  • Sr. Member
  • Posts: 335
  • In the last days perilous times shall come
    • View Profile
Quote
What this means:

Those who murder (after claiming Christianity) are not disciples of Yeshua, no matter what they claim.  Hence, they are not Christian.

Those who do not kill -kafir that continue to spread their 'false doctrine' or refuse jizya- (after claiming Islam) are not disciples of Muhammad or adherents to Allah's decrees.  Hence, not Muslim.

The world can't see this because they've chosen to believe the lie.

Just wondering, how likely is it that the world's political elite do not actually understand the true nature of Islam? I think it very unlikely. After all, one only has to read the Quran to grasp the underlying rationale behind the murderous ISIS etc. It might be that they have chosen to fabricate a lie in an attempt to neutralise the teachings of Muhammed. Propaganda wars are a frequent favourite of those who "know best."

What I do know is that, at this point in history, we have "the beast and it's image", and one that has "two horns like a lamb but speaks like a dragon" that 'gives life' to that image causing it to move and speak (and be worshiped and adored).
« Last Edit: September 18, 2016, 05:18:15 PM by ExMilitary »

PeteWaldo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 4106
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
The last time we wrote about the Gallup polling organization we came to find out that it seems they are just another arm of the politically correct Democrat/Marxist mainstream media Left.

Most recent polls:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/#!

In light of the OP of this thread, Forum members shouldn't have been surprised to find that according to the info at the following link Gallup was the least accurate polling organization for the last three elections, as it seems they create polls for propaganda purposes (and even try to spike the result when it doesn't serve the Left) while IBD has had the most accurate polling average over the last three presidential elections. They've got Trump +2.
http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-tracking-poll-most-accurate-presidential-poll/

If folks don't go out and vote against Hillary, the Marxists will own everything, and most importantly speech. We have seen that they already own the mainstream media, the Attorney General (whom the Clintons have owned since 1999) and Justice Department, State Department, James "the cleaner" Comey and the FBI that they use to slow conservative organization's applications for tax exempt status as well as to attack dissidents with targeting audits, but if Hillary's elected would give license to add onto Hillary's multiple felonies, Bill and Hill's pay-to-play foundation scheme, and most recently we find these government agencies more than willing to turn a blind eye to the breaking of campaign finance law, through Hillary's campaign working directly with George Soros funded super PACs.

Most importantly will be the accelerating slaughter of unborn children, right up until the day they are born, if Hillary has her way. How will folks feel about this who didn't bother to vote?

But then, of course it was the Dems that created the campaign finance laws that they knew Republicans would abide by, while they would be feel free ignore them. Most recently and outrageously pressing too allow people to vote without any ID whatsoever resulting in 18 million invalid registrations including 2 million dead people. Consider that in relation to the "hanging chad" of the 2000 election.

Take for example this "HIDDEN CAM: NYC Democratic Election Commissioner, "They Bus People Around to Vote"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUDTcxIqqM0

For folks in this forum who don't have kids or young loved ones, I suppose you could laugh it all off, about a world in which the only unfettered speech that would be allowed would be that of Muslims? Let alone that would be the only group free to practice their religion, the way it even is in Canada, where pastors are imprisoned for preaching out of scripture with which the culture police disagree.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/blasphemy_laws.htm

It's too late to save the Internet, Obama already saw to that:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5202.0

But at least we may be able to still work to keep the freedom to write and publish physical books and sell hard copies at Amazon and other retailers. Maybe a lot more than I am imagining of Obama's evil "legacy" can get reversed if Hillary looses.

ExMilitary

  • ecclesia
  • Sr. Member
  • Posts: 335
  • In the last days perilous times shall come
    • View Profile
How will folks feel about this who didn't bother to vote?

I'm not voting.  Trump has been 'testing the waters' since 1999, even saying Oprah Winfrey would be his ideal running mate.

As recently as July/August 2015

Trump: "I love God and my church."
Church: "He's not an active member."

Frank Luntz: "Have you ever asked God for forgiveness?"
Trump: "I am not sure I have. I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don't think so... I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don't bring God into that picture. I don't."

As recently as April 2016

Donald Trump's favorite book is 'the Bible'.  His favorite verse is 'an eye for an eye'.
Donald Trump still supports abortion in cases of rape, incest, and when the life of the mother is at stake.  He supports the murdering children for the crimes of the father.
I believe he flip-flopped and said that if abortion was outlawed, women who get abortions should not go to prison for murder.  This flip-flop was definite pandering.

Now, how does one choose between the murder of thousands and millions?  Who's fault is it really in an obviously rigged system?

How will I feel if Hillary is elected?  How will I feel if Trump is elected?  I'm not sure, but I will take solace in knowing that there was no darkness in the land of Goshen.  While Egypt perished, God's people did not.

PeteWaldo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 4106
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
How will folks feel about this who didn't bother to vote?

I'm not voting.  Trump has been 'testing the waters' since 1999, even saying Oprah Winfrey would be his ideal running mate.

As recently as July/August 2015

Trump: "I love God and my church."
Church: "He's not an active member."

Frank Luntz: "Have you ever asked God for forgiveness?"
Trump: "I am not sure I have. I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don't think so... I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don't bring God into that picture. I don't."

So rather than Trump, your non-vote goes to support Hillary, because she is such a Godly woman? One who we already know not only doesn't "try to make it right", but fully intended to rip off the Haitians relief dough while pocketing some and passing more on to their crony capitalist buds - ripping off one of the poorest countries on earth while the Haitians were flat on their backs.
She and Bill double teamed the outgoing Colombian president so Hillary's State department could approve a trade deal with Columbia so a tropical rain forest could be cut down by Bill's Canadian buddy and shipped to China, while Bill received a 750,000 speaking fee (appalling from a country that poor - let alone the 700K speaking fees he collected from a Nigerian company) and the Clinton Foundation received $150 million from Bill's Canadian buddy. And then there's Hill and Bill's sale of U.S. uranium to the Russians, by way of the same Canadian buddy as conduit, in exchange for contributions to their foundation.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5105.0

A non-vote supports Hillary whose chief assistant for a decade comes from Muslim Brotherhood stock, while Hillary worked with the OIC Islamic States that provide the death penalty for speech, to advance U.N. backed "blasphemy" laws to be imposed on U.S. citizens in an end run around our 1st amendment. If Hillary is elected it will spell the end of free speech, while that right is "interpreted" by her buddies she will lard the Supreme Court with.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/blasphemy_laws.htm

Trump already detailed the kind of justices he will pick. So what kind of Supreme Court justices can we suppose Hillary will pick? Their anti-Christian pro-Islam jurisprudence will be suffered for generations to come.

Do you think Bill and HIll earned the 250 million they have accumulated personally since Bill left office (while stealing White House furniture I might add). That doesn't include the 2 billion their foundation has taken in for pay-to-play. Both personally and Foundation taking money from Islamic countries with some of the worst human rights records in the world.

As recently as April 2016

Donald Trump's favorite book is 'the Bible'.  His favorite verse is 'an eye for an eye'.
Donald Trump still supports abortion in cases of rape, incest, and when the life of the mother is at stake. He supports the murdering children for the crimes of the father.

But by not voting for Trump you are supporting Hillary's abortion on demand, right up until the day before a baby is born. And doing it because you object to Trump's spontaneously feeling it would be OK for a woman to abort a baby that is the result of being raped by her father?
Before replying to that please note my preface on the abortion thread. That discussion will never even begin if the Left takes control:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5216.0

Let alone that Trump suggested the kind of conservative judges he would appoint would rightly send it back to the States, where it belongs. His opinion is, of course, is as irrelevant as Hillary's is, since the President doesn't make any such decision, but the justices that either candidate select definitely will.

I believe he flip-flopped and said that if abortion was outlawed, women who get abortions should not go to prison for murder.  This flip-flop was definite pandering.

I believe he blurted out an answer to a "gotcha" question spontaneously during a debate, that he hadn't previously thought through, and later changed it because he thought better of it. I doubt you would find a single instance of him expressing that as an opinion prior to that "gotcha" question. Indeed he had formerly been pro abortion.
The same way that one of the last remaining pro life democrats recently made what he called a "moral" decision to be pro-choice (death).

Now, how does one choose between the murder of thousands and millions?

Tacitly voting for Hillary chooses a preference for the maximum possible number of abortions to be performed since it is by the mother's simple choice, right on through the 9th month. Call it, abortion completely unimpeded.

Who's fault is it really in an obviously rigged system?

Which is another good point. Not voting for Trump is a vote for the party that the dead vote always favors. A vote for the party that is always the greatest perpetrator and beneficiary of election fraud. Let alone the grand new scheme of allowing voting without identification as posted in the thread at this link:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5224.0
Along with the violations of campaign finance law with Hillary's campaign conspiring with George Soros funded super PACs. Let alone that her purely amoral and reprobate purpose was to hire professional agitators, to show up at Trump rallies to block roads and start riots and injure Trump supporters as well as police, so that Hillary could sanctimoniously and Holier than thou stand in front of the TV cameras as say "Gee look at all the trouble Donald Trump's rhetoric causes!". Pure conniving filth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

How will I feel if Hillary is elected?  How will I feel if Trump is elected?  I'm not sure, but I will take solace in knowing that there was no darkness in the land of Goshen.  While Egypt perished, God's people did not.

I agree that Trump would be a wild card. Since he wasn't the guy laying the bricks on his building projects, by the same token, we can hope he will delegate tasks to those conservatives who are well versed and most able to take on the tasks, including conservative Supreme Court justices.

With Hillary we know what we are getting. A Supreme Court larded with flaming liberals who will work to destroy what few religious liberties Christians have left, while further lionizing and legalizing Islam, while limiting speech to that approved by Muslims and the culture police of the Left.
We get two people moving into the White House that are both guilty of multiple felonies, in Bill's case lying to a Grand Jury, Congress and the American people and being disgraced, impeached and disbarred while desecrating the office of the President, and in Hillary's case lying to Congress and the American people on countless occasions.
We will get two crony capitalist champions, money laundering felons, racketeers along with their international pay-for-play scheme with terrorist regime money, who would once in office be able to license themselves to double down on more malfeasance, since they would own the U.S. legal system, even more completely than James "the cleaner" Comey and Loretta Lynch have demonstrated that they already do. More hidden private servers with Hillary conducting the nation's business for her own personal benefit.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5141.0

Did you watch Clinton cash?
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5105.0
Judicial Watch Panel: Clinton Scandal Update – Emails and the Clinton Foundation
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5210.0
Just throwing whoever they want in jail, like this guy, as African tin-pot dictators do.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5116.0
Selected Intentionally False Representations in Clinton Foundation Public Filing
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5215.0

Don't be concerned, ExMil, I'll move these threads out of this section after the election. I just thought that if the posting of them could help save babies in the future from being the victims of abortion on demand through the 9th month, it would be worth the effort.
http://suewidemark.netfirms.com/shafer2.htm

ExMilitary

  • ecclesia
  • Sr. Member
  • Posts: 335
  • In the last days perilous times shall come
    • View Profile
Did you watch Clinton cash?
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5105.0

Yes.

Here is the bottom line.  I am partially to blame for the moral decay in this country, but I've repented.  No more compromise.

I've had people use the "a vote/non-vote for so-and-so is a vote for [insert greater evil name here]".  The people I've voted for are almost never elected (or even make it past the primaries), and those who blame me for wasting my vote/non-vote are free to do so. 

There were people far godlier available during the primaries, but Trump won.  America will get exactly what she wants and deserves.  I will continue to hang onto the truth that "my kingdom is not of this world".

PeteWaldo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 4106
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Did you watch Clinton cash?
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5105.0

Yes.

Here is the bottom line.  I am partially to blame for the moral decay in this country, but I've repented.  No more compromise.

I've had people use the "a vote/non-vote for so-and-so is a vote for [insert greater evil name here]".  The people I've voted for are almost never elected (or even make it past the primaries), and those who blame me for wasting my vote/non-vote are free to do so. 

There were people far godlier available during the primaries, but Trump won.

That's the whole point. Every one of those candidates would have done a better job, and most of them were very principled constitutional conservatives. That's why the Democrat controlled media paraded around Donald Trump during the primaries, in efforts to drown out the voices of those tremendously more qualified candidates, who were articulate enough to destroy the Democrats in debate and on the issues. The Democrat media nominated Mitt Romney for the same reason. To do their best to assure a Republican loss. The Democrat media has elected most of our government over the last half century, and now when it looks like the people could actually stand a chance at taking our country back (though far too late) through alternate media, if Dems are elected the alternate media will be increasingly silenced through law suits and regulation.

It was all neutral airing of Trump bloviating during the primaries, because that's who they wanted their candidate to run against. I'm shocked that Trump is still doing as well as he is, in spite of himself, while still not spending even a fraction of what Hillary has. The latest "accusation" against trump being that he took a woman's arm. Donald Trump entertains hundreds of people at a time at his Mara Lago home, like for the annual Red Cross Ball fundraiser.
When I myself greet people it would not be odd for me to place my hand on their upper arm while I kiss them on both cheeks (or "side of the mouth" as another accuser put it).

Now I doubt Trump will actually bring the revolution he promised, but what if he actually does undo all the unconstitutional executive orders of Obama? What if he goes in an fires all the Federal judges and replaces them with conservatives, the way the Bill Clinton did when he seized office and replaced them with liberals. What if regulation is reduced and business begins to take off again, increasing the flow of tax revenue even with tax cuts.

The other day I realized that in one speech he built a wall on all our borders. He said that any illegal alien that is deported, and returns to the U.S., will be subject to a 2 year prison sentence. Any that is deported a second time and returns will get a 5 year sentence.
So what does that do for the prospects of a person cheating their way in the first time? They know that if they don't wait in line with all of the people that want to come her lawfully, and instead come and get deported, they have ruined their chance at coming forever.

So what has happened to your health insurance rates? As crazily as our rates went up, the insurance company just announced they will no longer insure my wife. The agent said that nobody will, even though my wife is the picture of health.

If Hillary gets in the result IS absolutely predictable. Shutting down small business through more regulation, while hiring union fat cats that contributed to her campaign and other crony capitalists, to go over budget on public works projects without consequence. The inexorable march to duplicate, the failure of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, through central planning by a bloated bureaucratic government. The end of the private sector and realization of the Left's ultimate Marxist goals.

America will get exactly what she wants and deserves.

Without question. And if I didn't have kids I could even celebrate that. But since I do have kids I feel like I have to do everything that is in my power toward advancing their future. I believe my forefathers would have done the same, and indeed did take action, rather than resting on their laurels and letting the British rule the day. It isn't like the candidates we have been discussing are equivalents regarding our Constitutional rights.

I will continue to hang onto the truth that "my kingdom is not of this world".

If Republicans had quit and sat back on their haunches in 1865, when the 13th Amendment that abolished slavery was passed with 100% of congressional Republican support, the only 23% of congressional Democrats that supported abolishing slavery would have lost to the majority of Democrats that were in favor of slavery, and we might still be trading slaves today.
The 14th Amendment that gave full citizenship to freed slaves passed with 94% Republican support and 0% Democrat support in congress.
Blacks may have still not had the right to vote today, without the 100% Republican support in Congress and 0% Democrat support.

Much to my surprise, Donald Trump even proposed eliminating Lyndon Johnson's back door prohibition on places of worship getting involved with electing our nation's leaders, through his 501C3 inception and regulations.

PeteWaldo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 4106
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
I believe he flip-flopped and said that if abortion was outlawed, women who get abortions should not go to prison for murder.  This flip-flop was definite pandering.

I believe he blurted out an answer to a "gotcha" question spontaneously during a debate, that he hadn't previously thought through, and later changed it because he thought better of it. I doubt you would find a single instance of him expressing that as an opinion prior to that "gotcha" question. Indeed he had formerly been pro abortion.

Further to the point of imprisoning women who kill their babies (I believe murder is an inappropriate term as it implies that it's done with malice), have you ever considered the mothers to be victims of the abortion industry, as well as their unborn children?
How many of them are under the age of 26, which is about the time our brains become mature enough to be able to separate our emotions from our intellect? How many of them were talked into their abortions, by the reprobates that profit from the killing?
How many of them realize only too late, that the mistake they made will haunt them every day for the rest of their lives, because they were deprived of a real conversation and support, regarding the long term psychological consequences of their abortion?

ExMilitary

  • ecclesia
  • Sr. Member
  • Posts: 335
  • In the last days perilous times shall come
    • View Profile
I believe he flip-flopped and said that if abortion was outlawed, women who get abortions should not go to prison for murder.  This flip-flop was definite pandering.

I believe he blurted out an answer to a "gotcha" question spontaneously during a debate, that he hadn't previously thought through, and later changed it because he thought better of it. I doubt you would find a single instance of him expressing that as an opinion prior to that "gotcha" question. Indeed he had formerly been pro abortion.

Further to the point of imprisoning women who kill their babies (I believe murder is an inappropriate term as it implies that it's done with malice), have you ever considered the mothers to be victims of the abortion industry, as well as their unborn children?
How many of them are under the age of 26, which is about the time our brains become mature enough to be able to separate our emotions from our intellect? How many of them were talked into their abortions, by the reprobates that profit from the killing?
How many of them realize only too late, that the mistake they made will haunt them every day for the rest of their lives, because they were deprived of a real conversation and support, regarding the long term psychological consequences of their abortion?

1 John 3:15.  Most (the VAST majority of women) who get abortions are choosing themselves over someone else in order to increase their prosperity.  Are they doing it in ignorance?  Probably.  Does that make them any less responsible for murder?  Not according to Yeshua or His apostle.  Hate does not have to come with knowledge in order to be considered sin.

If these people don't repent, they will receive far worse than prison.  They will receive eternal damnation.

To your point: Luke 17:1

Regardless, I am out there often, and, yes, it is often done with malice and rejoicing in evil.  These women smile.  They laugh at us.  They tell us how enjoyable it was to kill their baby... literally dancing with demonic glee.  Are teenagers talked into it?  Some of them are, but what we are seeing is the wrath of God being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness.  These people are "given over" by God to their own reprobate beliefs.  I've been there.  Even "innocent" teenagers, who have been wrongly taught, HATE the Son of God... in ignorance (because they've likely been given over by God to ignorance and darkness).  "The world hates me because I testify that its deeds are evil."