http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/john-lewis-trump-isnt-a-legitimate-president/ar-aalqsqs?li=bbmkt5r&ocid=spartanntp.
I don't trust the CIA, FBI or NSA - I believe they are politicized and on their own side, which is rarely that of absolute truth.
Why should all those agencies tell a falsehood? What would motivate them to do that? There must be a motive if upwards of 17 different agencies are in collusion with each other on a matter of grave importance.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/john-lewis-trump-isnt-a-legitimate-president/ar-aalqsqs?li=bbmkt5r&ocid=spartanntp.
Simon,
There is still ZERO evidence of any hacking done by any foreign government. All we have is the CIA saying "trust us, we think it might have happened".
The CIA, FBI, NSA and a dozen other intelligence organizations have stated unequivocally that the Russians were behind it. They were even able to tell that Russians in high positions were congratulating themselves on Trump's win.
Here is the declassified version of the intelligence communities report.
in the time since i've left the borg behind i've had a few things hit me as to how words were used.
i'm wondering if anyone else has some similar examples, but here are some things that have made me think:.
watchtower - my whole life i saw this as a thing of protection from outside evil forces, and then when i left someone pointed out "isn't that what they used to keep people in prison".
Schnell,
@Village Idiot, I told a co-worker they call it "going out in service". He laughed.
I had a co-worker challenge me to tell him the special phrase the JWs use in the d to d work. He became quiet when I told him "field service".
Another co-worker laughed when I told him that JWs use the phrase "The Truth". He said "What does that mean - that we're in the lie?" He kept joking about it for the next several weeks. Every time he saw me he would say "Hey brother, we're in the lie!"
in the time since i've left the borg behind i've had a few things hit me as to how words were used.
i'm wondering if anyone else has some similar examples, but here are some things that have made me think:.
watchtower - my whole life i saw this as a thing of protection from outside evil forces, and then when i left someone pointed out "isn't that what they used to keep people in prison".
Theocratic:
Any arrangement or behavior that was approved of was considered "theocratic". Any person or arrangement that did not fall in line was referred to as "untheocratic".
Heart-condition:
A reference to your spirituality as opposed to your needing triple-bypass surgery.
House-holder:
A resident of a house or apartment that was being visited out in field service.
Field-service:
Going out in the door to door preaching.
a couple of examples of scriptures hardly ever quoted is 1 tim.
2:12- "i do not permit a woman to teach, or to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence".
or verse 11- "let a woman learn in silence with full submissiveness.".
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16 New International Version
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/john-lewis-trump-isnt-a-legitimate-president/ar-aalqsqs?li=bbmkt5r&ocid=spartanntp.
I have yet to hear what a single one of those emails said that made Hillary Clinton look bad
They show that they colluded with the DNC to "un-level" the playing field against Sanders (John Lewis and the CBC were involved in this by the looks of things). Apparently, Clinton thought she had the right to decide who the DNC candidate should be (her) and not the electorate.
Which I consider to be pathetic but should that count towards electing Trump? The people most likely to be incensed about this were Bernie Sander's supporters. They may have hated Hillary's guts but they're not likely to have voted for Trump even as a protest vote.
Also, the campaign was colluding with journalists to get questions in advance. And that she was calculating and giving a different message in private than her public position.
Let's go through this thought experiment:
You have a choice between electing Mussolini or Hillary. Should one justify what happens after Mussolini wins by saying that Hillary was a poor candidate? Would you consider Hillary anywhere near as bad as Trump? Who is the lesser of two evils? Mussolini (=Trump) or Hillary?
Bottom line, they are not equal. Hillary was a mediocrity who would have kept the status quo; no change. Trump is nothing but desolation.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/john-lewis-trump-isnt-a-legitimate-president/ar-aalqsqs?li=bbmkt5r&ocid=spartanntp.
Simon,
And what makes America so special that they can meddle in everyone else's elections but think theirs should be untouchable?
That's right, the United States has interfered with elections in other countries. The U.S. even overthrew the fairly elected President of Chile on September 11th, 1973 (Please note the irony). But does that justify the Russians?
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/john-lewis-trump-isnt-a-legitimate-president/ar-aalqsqs?li=bbmkt5r&ocid=spartanntp.
Simon,
If Russia made up lies about Clinton then they should call them out on it. But if Russia just exposed lies and corruption by Clinton then they informed the US electorate more than the main-stream media was willing to do and did everyone a service.
I have yet to hear what a single one of those emails said that made Hillary Clinton look bad. It seems that the mere presence of those emails made people assume that they exposed some wrongdoing on her part. Anyone know anything about a single email that was released?
i was wondering if the gb has forbidden vaping yet, so i did a search.
there was a thread from a year ago, the comments covered all the bases i suspected the wt would come up with.
i'm out, so it doesn't really matter to me.
What about medical Marijuana, vaped or otherwise?
in conversation with an old jw friend today, it struck me that most jws have replaced their personal conscience with a collective one.. instead of training their own mental powers to distinguish right from wrong, as the bible encourages, they are content to shift personal accountability away from themselves and onto the impersonal org.
whatever behaviour may prompt an ordinary person to have serious misgivings ( such as ignoring glaring misapplication of scripture or rejecting basic human decency in favour of unchristian shunning ) they prefer to have those decisions made for them.. history teaches us, however, that there is no absolution for people who behave unethically or cruelly by allowing the excuse of 'obeying orders' to override what their inner voice should scream is inherently wrong..
How many JWs still have a personal conscience?
As many as become apostates.
