Posts by Jehalapeno

42

Dear Syrian Refugees

by Simon in

welcome to canada from one immigrant to another !.

calgary is welcoming it's first refugees from syria and iraq so tomorrow i'm going to take all the winter clothing that we have and donate it to a women / children's charity.

it's not much (well, actually, it's a huge pile ... everything from when we first moved over!

Jehalapeno

Let's remember that if genuine refugees had a choice, they wouldn't choose to be refugees.

"We don't want to be refugees. We want to stay in our country."

https://youtu.be/s3uaf1NFxXc

80

President Trump launches missile strike against Syria

by jwleaks in

jw
friends

pesident trump authorized the missile strike because “it is in the vital, national security interest of the united states to prevent and deter the use of deadly chemical weapons.” .

59 tomahawk missiles were launched from two us navy ships.. russia has condemned the action.. https://youtu.be/4svp3yfneyq.

.

Jehalapeno

"Putin was able to manipulate Trump to his purposes..." [evidence and citation needed]

86

Susan Rice Sought Names of Trump Associates in Intel?

by freemindfade in

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-03/top-obama-adviser-sought-names-of-trump-associates-in-intel.

what can we make of this?

rice is on record being a racist and lying about benghazi, now this?

Jehalapeno

Understand: There would have been no intelligence need for Susan Rice to ask for identities to be unmasked. If there had been a real need to reveal the identities — an intelligence need based on American interests — the unmasking would have been done by the investigating agencies.
The national-security adviser is not an investigator. She is a White House staffer. The president’s staff is a consumer of intelligence, not a generator or collector of it. If Susan Rice was unmasking Americans, it was not to fulfill an intelligence need based on American interests; it was to fulfill a political desire based on Democratic-party interests.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446415/susan-rice-unmasking-trump-campaign-members-obama-administration-fbi-cia-nsa

13

Who copied who when it comes to the website logo?

by oppostate in

just noticed this very peculiarly uncanny similarity between website logos.did the jw.0rg come first or after--did the wt copy another website's logo?.

.

Jehalapeno

They mainly use blue, but if I recall correctly, when they first launched the new jw.org website, it was a green logo.

I think they went to blue for the umbrella brand and reserved the alternate colors for different products: JW Language app is now green, JW Library app is Purple, etc.

See: The Wayback Machine Capture right after the launch with Green as the primary color.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130701070835/http://www.jw.org/en/

17

Can we support Russian government's ban?

by intropist in

jw
friends

글쓴이: 류비 / 시간: 목, 03/30/2017 - 14:48. .

hi, i want to leave my personal opinion on the matter of russian government's banning on the activity of jehovah's witnesses in their territory.

i think it's more or less important because bearing a certain opinion is related with the quality of life.

Jehalapeno

Why am I not surprised someone down voted my rational comment? Fascists aren't rational, I guess.

17

Can we support Russian government's ban?

by intropist in

jw
friends

글쓴이: 류비 / 시간: 목, 03/30/2017 - 14:48. .

hi, i want to leave my personal opinion on the matter of russian government's banning on the activity of jehovah's witnesses in their territory.

i think it's more or less important because bearing a certain opinion is related with the quality of life.

Jehalapeno

You don't have to ban an entire religion to punish harmful behavior.

Shunning, although extremely mentally anguishing for many of us, should never be banned or outlawed. I pick and choose who I associate with. And if I decide I can't stand someone, I shun them. Cut them off completely. I have done that with certain toxic family members myself, regardless of religion.

You can make a law that does not allow people to refuse lifesaving medical treatment (blood transfusions) for religious reasons. This is borderline fascist, in my opinion, but it is preferable to banning an entire belief system from worshipping in freedom.

You can make a law that requires all child abuse allegations, regardless of the number of witnesses, to be reported to police for investigation. And if people violate that law, they can serve Jail time. Again, banning an entire belief system is overkill for this issue.

If you feel proselytizing is extremism, you can ban certain activities. No door to door canvassing. No street witnessing. Enforce the law with stiff fines. JWs aren't rich and they'll soon find other ways to get their time in other than public evangelizing.

again, you don't ban an entire belief system. You legislate consequences for the harmful conduct.

It's really quite simple: if you support the ban, you are LITERALLY supporting fascism. You escaped a fascist authoritarian organization only to support fascist authoritarian governmental actions.

233

Number of Muslims protesting London terrorist attack = ZERO. Number of Muslims protesting forced Mosque closure in France = HUNDREDS

by kpop in

so it is now two days after another islamic terrorist attack.

how many muslims are in the streets protesting and condemning this evil?

how many are marching in all the big cities condemning this in mass protests?.

Jehalapeno

Now now, Bohm...it's not that your views are controversial...it's that they're WRONG. lol

233

Number of Muslims protesting London terrorist attack = ZERO. Number of Muslims protesting forced Mosque closure in France = HUNDREDS

by kpop in

so it is now two days after another islamic terrorist attack.

how many muslims are in the streets protesting and condemning this evil?

how many are marching in all the big cities condemning this in mass protests?.

Jehalapeno

bohm:

There's nothing "wrong" with Muslims, just as there's nothing "wrong" with individual Jehovah's Witnesses, aside from the fact that they've been duped and brainwashed by childhood indoctrination.

It's the ideology that's toxic and detrimental to society as a whole, and should rightly be criticized.

The hesitancy of a lot on the left (not all the left, just the snowflakes) to criticize an oppressive, homophobic, xenophobic, misogynist ideology is where the issue lies.

Open, unabashed criticism of Islam, without publicly shaming the critic as an "Islamophobe," is what's needed if their ideology has any hope of reform.

Christianity was a shitty religion for centuries. Hell, it was horrible and oppressive for over a millennium. For the most part, they had a reformation that has steadily scaled back the extremism over the centuries. I still think Christianity is awful. But, it sure is a lot better today than it was 800 years ago. Improvement is improvement. And it only has improved and lessened its influence by allowing free and open criticism of the doctrine.

The same needs to happen to Islam.

Spicy blessings upon thee.

20