Jump to content


Photo

Because Trump 2.0


  • Please log in to reply
15800 replies to this topic

#13401 Jeff

Jeff

    Godfather of Tanknet Birthday Greetings

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,389 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 1716 PM

Judicial Watch has done more for this country than the DOJ or utterly corrupt FBI in showing the coup and the plotters who wanted to overthrow our country:  https://www.thegatew...tion-day-video/

 

They've been very successful with their FOIA requests, look for the Left to plug that gap in their secrecy and control.


  • 0

#13402 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,758 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 1753 PM

We can only wonder why Christopher Wray still has a job.  He's running interference for the malfeasance that has transpired in his bureau and evidently both AG Barr and Trump are good with it.  AG Barr, don't really know about, but Trump, never shy about speaking his mind, has been totally silent with regard to Wray and his obstruction.


  • 0

#13403 Rick

Rick

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,108 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 1933 PM

 

 

The Democrats have become communists, and ARE the party of Left Wing extremism.  They want to destroy this country, and are doing their [email protected] best to get there.  They need to be stopped, and the best way to do that is to unelect them.

 

Your blathering means nothing because you don't know the meaning of some of the words you use.

 

 

Your level of genius must be a hell of a burden for you to bear.

 

:D  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D


  • 0

#13404 MiloMorai

MiloMorai

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,957 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 1940 PM

King Canute couldn't stop the tide coming in.


  • 0

#13405 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,173 posts

Posted 15 September 2019 - 2343 PM

AIUI, religious wars of the civil ilk are not fought over laws limiting anti-social behavior, or regulations on commerce etc., but over laws limiting faith and religious practices themselves.

For example, the English Civil War wasn't fought over a debate concerning the illegality of burglary, it was fought over what church one attended. Which to our modern eyes looks insane, but back in the day churches were a big power thing.


The current move of the social justice pushing left is along similar religious functions just with no supernatural source. It's still granted knowledge with sin, sinners, heresy, heretical teachings, enlightened people and all of the other trappings. If you think otherwise, you're deluded or not paying attention.
  • 0

#13406 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,139 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0152 AM

 

Yes i agree all main religeons are siummilar in teaching good not bad, but unfortunatelly historic experience tells us even minor differences in understanding what is "good" and what is "bad" were enough for decades of civil wars, so it is quite logical to assume it may be uneasy to base legal process on religeon.


AIUI, religious wars of the civil ilk are not fought over laws limiting anti-social behavior, or regulations on commerce etc., but over laws limiting faith and religious practices themselves.

For example, the English Civil War wasn't fought over a debate concerning the illegality of burglary, it was fought over what church one attended. Which to our modern eyes looks insane, but back in the day churches were a big power thing.

 

 

Perhaps even more subtle than that. It also was about the WAY you attended the church you attended.

 

Charles deigned to alter the Church service to one more catholic in origin, even though the Churches were still protestant. And people went nuts, because they saw it as papery by the back door. Which to be fair to them, to some extent it might have been. This went down particularly badly in Scotland IIRC. Ok, so there was some English politicians that were scheming for more power, and this all provided an excuse to move against Charles. But it wasnt as if he was much worried about what anyone thought, even if the Politicians had been on his side.

 

I dont know if this is why, other than the house of Lords, that England has been so deterred to make Politics secular. But I strongly suspect its at least part of the reason. I strongly suspect if there had been a hint of religion in the causes of the American civil war, America would be no different right now.


  • 0

#13407 Roman Alymov

Roman Alymov

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,543 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0326 AM

 

We know it takes two to tango – and people who were opposing those who were fighting to make slavery illegal were also not forces of nature or Buddists or Muslims  but Christians and, I think, were sure they were also “led by God” in this fight. It is not fault of Christianity but just human nature: to adopt religion to what they believe is “good”. Confederate soldiers were reading the same Bible and singing the same hymns as their opponents from North. Yes I know it is simplification and US Civil war was not only about slavery etc. but still both sides of it were the same Christians, often from the same family. The same was with Russian Civil war (complicated by presence of other religious groups, who were in turn equally divided between two sides , for example my grandgrandfather’s 19 Don Cossack regiment commander was ethnic Kalmyk and Buddist – he was killed in Civil war on “White” side in 1918, despite of many Kalmyks supporting “Red” side)

 

 

 

I do not know enough about the Russian Civil War to make a statement, except to say it is sad to hear of your great-grandfather's fate.  

Thank you, but I am afraid I failed to explain my idea in correct way, so let me separate it into simple steps:
1) My grand grandfather died long before Rus Civil war – he was KIA in 1915 fighting Germans in what is now Baltic states, as NCO in 19th Don Cossack regiment;
2) Commander of  19th Don Cossack regiment, ethnic Kalmyk (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalmyks ) and Buddist, survived WWI (with lots of decorations for bravery) to be later KIA in Russian Civil war on White side.


  • 0

#13408 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,216 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0340 AM

 

 

Yes i agree all main religeons are siummilar in teaching good not bad, but unfortunatelly historic experience tells us even minor differences in understanding what is "good" and what is "bad" were enough for decades of civil wars, so it is quite logical to assume it may be uneasy to base legal process on religeon.


AIUI, religious wars of the civil ilk are not fought over laws limiting anti-social behavior, or regulations on commerce etc., but over laws limiting faith and religious practices themselves.

For example, the English Civil War wasn't fought over a debate concerning the illegality of burglary, it was fought over what church one attended. Which to our modern eyes looks insane, but back in the day churches were a big power thing.

 

 

Perhaps even more subtle than that. It also was about the WAY you attended the church you attended.

 

Charles deigned to alter the Church service to one more catholic in origin, even though the Churches were still protestant. And people went nuts, because they saw it as papery by the back door. Which to be fair to them, to some extent it might have been. This went down particularly badly in Scotland IIRC. Ok, so there was some English politicians that were scheming for more power, and this all provided an excuse to move against Charles. But it wasnt as if he was much worried about what anyone thought, even if the Politicians had been on his side.

 

I dont know if this is why, other than the house of Lords, that England has been so deterred to make Politics secular. But I strongly suspect its at least part of the reason. I strongly suspect if there had been a hint of religion in the causes of the American civil war, America would be no different right now.

 

 

It gets crazier (or perhaps saner) than that.  Queen Elizabeth decreed that the modern day equivalent of hot cross buns could only be baked and sold by bakers at Christmas and Easter.

 

This is because the origin of 'hot cross buns' goes back to baked goods called 'soul cakes' that were given to 'soulers' as alms on All Saints Day, as a bribe to pray for the souls of those in purgatory. 

 

Her father, Henry VIII, in his break with the Church of Rome had in effect abolished the belief in purgatory as being a Papist belief, a bit like the selling of indulgences, neither of which have any scriptural basis.  (and something that Martin Luther argued against, and which was later accepted by the Church of Rome when Pius V basically cancelled the sale of indulgences).

 

The baking and giving of 'soul cakes', aka hot cross buns, was seen as subversive to the crown of England.


  • 0

#13409 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,139 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0357 AM

Thats very interesting, I didnt know that. So they were in effect making it legal for a specific period, just so they could ensure it wouldn't become subversive? Thats almost modern political thinking. :D


  • 0

#13410 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,216 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0452 AM

Thats very interesting, I didnt know that. So they were in effect making it legal for a specific period, just so they could ensure it wouldn't become subversive? Thats almost modern political thinking. :D

 

More like making it illegal except for a certain period or two. Having them legal at Christmas and what we now call Easter means that the focus is on the centre of Christmas and Easter - yes, Christ - as opposed to drawing attention to the false doctrine of purgatory focused on All Saints Day / Hallowed Eve (yes, Halloween, which is really not just an American thing).


  • 0

#13411 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,139 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0457 AM

Thanks Doug, thats really interesting.


  • 0

#13412 Murph

Murph

    Hierophant Lord

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,034 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0519 AM

We can only wonder why Christopher Wray still has a job.  He's running interference for the malfeasance that has transpired in his bureau and evidently both AG Barr and Trump are good with it.  AG Barr, don't really know about, but Trump, never shy about speaking his mind, has been totally silent with regard to Wray and his obstruction.

Agreed.  He is providing top cover for the traitors and coup plotters.


  • 0

#13413 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe

    purposeful grimace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,213 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0545 AM

I dont know if this is why, other than the house of Lords, that England has been so deterred to make Politics secular. But I strongly suspect its at least part of the reason. I strongly suspect if there had been a hint of religion in the causes of the American civil war, America would be no different right now.

Given the extreme bloodshed of the ACW, had religion factored in, there would be two separate countries now. In the age of steam rail, canal boats, and efficient ships, people wouldn't have just stuck in place and endured.

 

However, I think you are badly off base in the usual European sense, that of conflating faith and religion in American culture. The worst overlap between religion and government here wasn't after the Revolution, or the ACW, it was during the 17th century when local governments at the behest of English governors required church (CoE, specifically) attendance in the mid-Atlantic colonies such as Virginia. Not surprisingly, the very concept of governmental secularity comes from Virginia (reinforced by the mess in Maryland after the Revolution).

 

It becomes laughable after awhile. The US has never had a state church, yet most if not all Nordic countries until recently have had a state church. Yet the world has been conditioned to believe in some Hollywood-esque framing of the US as run by churches. 


  • 0

#13414 Jeff

Jeff

    Godfather of Tanknet Birthday Greetings

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,389 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0605 AM

 

We can only wonder why Christopher Wray still has a job.  He's running interference for the malfeasance that has transpired in his bureau and evidently both AG Barr and Trump are good with it.  AG Barr, don't really know about, but Trump, never shy about speaking his mind, has been totally silent with regard to Wray and his obstruction.

Agreed.  He is providing top cover for the traitors and coup plotters.

 

 

Maybe Trump figures he only gets one mulligan on the FBI Director. Who recommended him for the job?


  • 0

#13415 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,139 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0645 AM

 

I dont know if this is why, other than the house of Lords, that England has been so deterred to make Politics secular. But I strongly suspect its at least part of the reason. I strongly suspect if there had been a hint of religion in the causes of the American civil war, America would be no different right now.

Given the extreme bloodshed of the ACW, had religion factored in, there would be two separate countries now. In the age of steam rail, canal boats, and efficient ships, people wouldn't have just stuck in place and endured.

 

However, I think you are badly off base in the usual European sense, that of conflating faith and religion in American culture. The worst overlap between religion and government here wasn't after the Revolution, or the ACW, it was during the 17th century when local governments at the behest of English governors required church (CoE, specifically) attendance in the mid-Atlantic colonies such as Virginia. Not surprisingly, the very concept of governmental secularity comes from Virginia (reinforced by the mess in Maryland after the Revolution).

 

It becomes laughable after awhile. The US has never had a state church, yet most if not all Nordic countries until recently have had a state church. Yet the world has been conditioned to believe in some Hollywood-esque framing of the US as run by churches. 

 

 

Yeah, I guess you are probably right.

 

I dont think we believe the churches run the US. But its very notable to us how much your Presidential candidates and Senator's court them. Over here, politicians have never really wore their religion on their sleeve. Tony Blair became a catholic, but only after he left office. Theresa May was the daughter of a Vicar and went to church every sunday. In America, much would be made of this. Over here, its a non issue.

 

I was just looking this up, and by way of example you can see this neatly encapsulated in this quote from Reagan, speaking at a Latter Day Saints church in Utah in 1982.

https://www.deseret....thomas-s-monson

 

“But there are other matters that all of us up here must take up. The matter of prayer in schools. I don't think God should ever have been expelled. There is that balanced budget amendment that we must have. There is tuition tax credits for those parents who are sending their children, perhaps, to a church school or an independent school at the same time they pay the full burden for supporting the public school. And I think they should get some recognition of that fact and some relief for the fact that they are supporting two school systems,” Reagan said. “And there is another problem very close to my heart: that more than a million unborn children every year are being denied the right to life. And I think it is time that we decide that unless and until someone can prove to us that the unborn are not truly living creatures, then we morally should adopt the principle that they are, until it can be proven otherwise.”

 

For us, that is a distinct link between Politics and Religious thought. For us, this is a deeply strange mix. I dont believe we have ever held politics and religion that closely since the restoration of the Monarchy. Well, unless you count the rejection of James II as religiously and not politically motivated.


  • 0

#13416 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,408 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0659 AM

Given the extreme bloodshed of the ACW, had religion factored in, there would be two separate countries now. In the age of steam rail, canal boats, and efficient ships, people wouldn't have just stuck in place and endured.


There's a grandiose What If somewhere in there, though it would in fact take some effort to introduce a religious angle into domestic American conflict. Probably to the point of eliminating the Establishment Clause from the First Amendment.
  • 0

#13417 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,139 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0716 AM

There WAS some linkage. I remember listening to a Podcast about John Brown, and he was IIRC, regarded as something of a religious fanatic. The Harpers Ferry Incident clearly was very large step along the way towards the Civil War. But although he seemed to receive a lot of patronage from people with religious scruples whom were linked to slavery abolitionists I dont get the impression abolition was more more than a fringe issue. One that most churches in the US would perhaps, understandably for the time, have steered a wide berth around.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 16 September 2019 - 0718 AM.

  • 0

#13418 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,408 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 0730 AM

I just looked around a little, and I think a possible handle might be via George Whitfield's slavery advocacy and Methodism. If southerners had realized the use of linking government to a denomination justifying the institution during the revolutionary era, things might have looked differently. As it is, the Methodist Episcopals, Presbyterians and Baptists all split into Northern and Southern branches over the issue 1837-1845.
  • 0

#13419 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,173 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 1110 AM

Wasn't a large segment of the abolitionist movement in the US and the UK vested in religious concepts?
  • 0

#13420 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,831 posts

Posted 16 September 2019 - 1124 AM

Wasn't a large segment of the abolitionist movement in the US and the UK vested in religious concepts?

 

How religious could it have been considering how deeply slavery is built into the Old Testament.

 

https://en.wikipedia...y#Old_Testament


  • 0