AmateurExpert 2 points ago +2 / -0

“Not having enough resources”…

“repeatedly denied requests”…

What does that remJ6ind me of? It seems familiar.

How about “continued coup attempt”?

AmateurExpert 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ah. Whatever the actuals are, on cue, there’s an expected narrative result.


AmateurExpert 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trump’s security has always been astounding. I don’t see how they’d allow fake Biden to put in fake security detail to leave super obvious vantage point unsecured unintentionally or through infiltrated negative intention.

Not saying I’m right, but these things are never face value.

AmateurExpert 1 point ago +1 / -0

Will go with them, per prior comment. Can’t blame anybody for defaulting to FAKE these days, though.

We also know things can be staged even with cameras on them.

Someone made a good point the other day in the “sliding” post about how being able to see who the up and down doots were would solve a lot of issues. One of your updoots is mine.

I fully acknowledge that whatever the method that’s being used to do whatever is going on is beyond my ability to fully understand it.

1 Corinthians 13:9-10: For we know in part, and we prophesy in part, but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

The one building with a clear line of sight and only 150 yards away.....and the SS doesn't have it secure? That tells me it was allowed to happen. Surely the SS isn't that incompetent?

This, per sylver’s comment, gives me some serious wtf. I don’t believe the SS has been compromised. They wouldn’t have let the area not be secured. Really begs the question of how this happened.

AmateurExpert 5 points ago +5 / -0

Don’t worry. I trust both doctors and people who get interviewed by news reports.

AmateurExpert 10 points ago +10 / -0

I regret that I have but one doot to give for this posting.

AmateurExpert 11 points ago +15 / -4

Are you saying deaths can’t be faked, and fake reports of deaths can’t be issued?

There’s been sunk boats to fake things, and run fake charges to blow up buildings, and fake fake fake fake fake fake fake, but “dead rallygoer” can’t be faked?

AmateurExpert 3 points ago +3 / -0

They stole it.

They’ve been stealing them for a long time.

They are going to be stopped.

They are going to give back what they stole.

They will be punished for stealing.


AmateurExpert 4 points ago +4 / -0

I’m not saying it’s not an invasion, nor that federal shouldn’t be the proper jurisdiction (nor that it’s the only proper jurisdiction). Adding context and pointing out that we should know where we stand, what we are asking for, and how to ask for it.

That it’s an invasion is simple. That it’s being enabled and driven by people living here should be obvious, and complicates things, especially as our domestic enemies still have a lot of power. Our appropriate response is most certainly not simple nor obvious.

Hopefully Trump helps it, of course. What is our best course of action?

One thing I’ve found interesting for a long time is how there were no passports or passport system until after the world wars. How did things work on immigration and international travel and commerce and citizenship prior to that?

AmateurExpert 2 points ago +2 / -0

I wonder what percentage of people here, or in normieland, know that a lot of Masonic lodges fly upside down pentagrams as their logo, with each region of power they seek to control on each of the points, and the word FATAL written around it, as if the rest wasn’t obvious enough.

Nor is that the end of the construction of that symbol.

“Order of the Eastern Star”

AmateurExpert 6 points ago +6 / -0

Not really, no. That take assumes that federal law is just unilaterally supercedent to state law, individual sovereignty, that jurisdictions are correct, and probably other issues.

We have operated for decades under a grotesque assumption that authority of law flows from federal, to state, to local, to individual, and that is not how American freedom works. This has a lot to do with a long-standing dispute between state and federal supremacy in law, and where the balance lies, that dates back to Washington leading the troops against the Whiskey Rebellion.

How were citizenship and immigration handled from 1600-1789, and from 1790-1850? Immigration definitely changed somehow in the late 1800s. A lot of us have expressed issues with the 1965 Hart Cellar Act.

We should do a good dig on this.


Moreover, how could we push our states and cities to follow federal law on immigration, and do we even want to do that without knowing what that law is? How do those acts interplay with USC?

AmateurExpert 1 point ago +1 / -0

I’m not quite sure where your comment was placing my statements at, as that was the exact thing I said I feared, but they have a link to “Antinomianism” there, and that’s likely a much better term for what I’ve been referring to with “Dispensationalism”.

I have been trying to wake Christians up to that, and slowly, because as we have seen, people do not like waking up.

Will listen to the podcast before commenting any further.


They hit on something that I was writing before deciding to listen to the podcast (actually, it was the entire response). I’ll go ahead and add that:

I believe in forgiveness of sin, and that sin must be repented of, and as I noted, mine has not been put away. Without repentance, there cannot be “forgiveness” of sin, only “tolerance”.

There are differences in scripture between intentional and unintentional sins. Unintentional sins were what was atoned for through the sacrificial system at the temples and synagogues. They were imperfect, and thus had to be repeated constantly for any unintentional sins. These sacrifices seem to be what were fulfilled on the cross, as well as an exemplar of how the law was to be followed, which had been strayed from as significantly as we have strayed from the constitution.

There was no sacrificial system for intentional sins, which we today treat quite casually, to what may eventually be our great dismay.

Every one of us should behave with appropriate fear that we show up and find out that Matthew 8:11-12 was talking about ME.

What do I fear? I fear that, and I pray that my intentional sins might also find some degree of grace before the throne.

Matthew 5:19: Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach [them], the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Modern pastors should be HORRIFIED.

Hebrews 10:26-29

26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, 27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. 28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: 29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

(Edit: ha! They cited that one)

AmateurExpert 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is this saying over 57% of all rapes in Sweden are by foreigners (seems like it’d be higher), with most of those being from 8 countries, or that 15.8% of all Somalis who come in are rapists?

The wording on that ratio is a little awkward.

AmateurExpert 1 point ago +1 / -0

“Britney” is disqualified from the Olympics, not because “she’s” black, but because “she” is inarguably a man. Look up “her” brick city mixtape photos, or the ones where “she’s” riding in a car.

Not even kind of questionable. That is a man.

They’re just trying to squeeze division and hatred out of it.

“Caitlyn” definitely looks odd, too.

view more: Next ›