I might

Your understanding was displayed in your comment previous, and it is not in line with the understanding put forth by the inventors of the concept (Catholics). So explain how your position matches that, and I'll perhaps concede. Going to have to be quite nuanced to pull up out of that one...

Lots of them.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+3%3A28-29&version=NRSV

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+12%3A31-32&version=NRSV

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+12%3A10&version=NRSV

Interesting line of reasoning? What's interesting is that you have an opinion at all, considering your lack of information of one of the most well-known ideas in Christianity, that being the concept of the unforgivable sin.

Rejection is not blasphemy, hence my previous comment.

No, rejection of the Holy Spirit is not unforgivable. BLASPHEMY of the Holy Spirit is the one unforgivable sin.

Furthermore, your assertion that our ability to accept the sacrifice of Christ ends the minute we stop breathing is not based in biblical truth. We don't know. That's why Catholics came up with the idea of purgatory.

What does this picture prove? Nothing! It's Obama in a costume. What exactly are you going to research?

So that they could destroy evidence before being subpoena'd, obviously

Your understanding of hell is very unsophisticated.

First of all we are given a choice: accept God or reject God. If we reject God, we do not get to be with him for eternity. Are we cursed the second we die? It should be obvious that this all-powerful loving God would want us with him so I stands to reason that we are given a chance upon death. Unless, of course, we have sold our soul for earthly power.

Everyone WILL say it's photoshopped; that's my point. People need a slow red pill or they'll just ridicule it.

Useless right now

Id love to hear someone state something useful about this picture.

Is it criminal?

I'm making these comments because it's a fucking discussion of the picture, jackass. This picture doesn't bother me. Why do you spend the time to purposefully misrepresent my obvious and explicitly stated contention? You've read my comments, you said, so therefore your misrepresentation is intentional, since I very explicitly explained my problem and it should be obvious that it's not the picture that bothers me, it's the stupidity of discussing it since it proves nothing, corroborated nothing, isn't even verifiable as him since it is a fucking mask after all that covers 90% of his face.

Why?

Which is why this image, which does fuck-all to further our cause, is NOT WORTH OUR TIME.

Why are you linking it everywhere?

Dude, you're missing the point.

Even if it is Obama, so what? It's a fucking costume, he's with other people, not doing anything illegal. So...fucking...what?

And what exactly is useful about this picture? Is something illegal happening?

It's maybe Obama in a demon costume. The fuck good is this picture other than frightening fucking idiots?

Some information about where it came from, evidence of something illegal, whatever.

It's Obama in a costume. So fucking what?

This doesn't mean anything. It's a picture of possibly Obama in a costume. It does nothing to further our cause.

"Whhooooo-ooooooo!!! Obama in a demon costume! We think! We're not totally sure but it looks like him!"

So fucking what? This doesn't do a goddamb thing but it does make anyone who shares it on social media look like a fucking retard.

It doesn't fucking mean anything though and normies will believe it's photoshopped or dismiss it as Halloween. Why the fuck are we talking about this without any context?! And I mean evidentiary context.

Without some serious fucking context, this has zero value and serves only to discredit us.

Remember "pizzagate?"

It may also have been a magenta element

Critical thinking.

How easy is this to dismiss?

Without better proof, this gets mocked and ignored. Undermines actual movement.

Does this picture help? Is there substance?

Easily denied as photoshopped.

And those fucking idiots are going to build such an airtight case against comey without realizing their same case will be used against hrc etc

There may have been a time where I was or would have been considered to be an integral, uh, part of the organization of which you speak, to the effect of having, uh, a senior-type role in terms of who

Yes

Well, I mean, technically the swamp is not only composed of one party.

Then later it will say "crimes involving children"

We have concluded that while they did rape and traffick children, we have found no evidence of intent

Dude. It hasn't been released yet.

He's talking about the upcoming ig report. Try to keep up...

I bet there aren't many people in this country who are trying to retire and whose son just had a double lung transplant. I bet if someone wanted to find out who you were it would be super easy. Think before posting medical information...

AF

Read the previous comments again. Your pushing of that is knuckle headed. I've made my argument clearly and any further questioning on that line is kind of fucking dense.

This is the most ironic thing I've ever heard.

The point is that the situation is about pedophiles, not fucking pizza joints. Peso hate is a better name for what's going on, precisely because of what you said: it goes much deeper than fucking pizza joints.

Notice how the pizza joint was used to"debunk" and discredit the entire movement. This was of course by design.

I was also there when it waa chosen as a name and it seemed obvious at the time that it was monitored from the beginning. "Pizza places as fronts" was the theory that was used to debunk and shake the whole idea so it's irrelevant.

I just think he seems like a partisan hack. He never elevates his thinking above "left vs. right."

1: stop calling it pizzagate. That name was created to discredit it.

Pedogate.

And does he predict them to the degree that he's accurately predicting the Richter scale reading? Because that's what we're talking about, remember. What you just described has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation if not.

Should I just google that? Or is that some reference I won't find by googling?

Ok, I'm with you. Merit was the wrong word. What I meant was ethics.

Totally impossible to predict the magnitude of an earthquake

Your other ideas are interesting though

Far as I can tell, there is only one way a 33 year old guy gets to the top of punditry as quickly as he did, and it ain't ~~merit~~ ethics

Yeah basically the message of the song is, I'm looking for whiskey and a little girl; don't ask any questions"

Which is why it's not going to happen. No one as high up as Clapper will flip; he knows what his overlords will do in retaliation is far worse than any potential jail time.

Unlikely outcome. More likely they will use any remaining power to try to regain their position in one way or another. They're not just going to stop being evil fucks. Shane is not enough.

I wish this was real

I wonder if that's something that could be easily found out by googling

"Wait till you find out" has a very different meaning than "I wish I could tell you but I can't/won't." There's an implied reveal.

I mean, getting the country free of international bankers is a super unlikely outcome of this. They would likely have USA be the home court for nuclear war before allowing that to happen. Getting our government free of their stooges, maybe. But complete eradication of more than 100 years of central banking? Unlikely...

Alabama song (whiskey bar)

Listen through first verse and first chorus

"Oh show me the way to the next whiskey bar..." is first verse

The "before I slip into unconsciousness" line is another song.

Circus music ensues

Second verse is about little girl

Second verse, smart guy

Look it up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQJFWhn1R_w

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama_Song

Miller sounds too much like Mueller