"They also killed a school-full of primary-school girls." - Wellifthisisntdandy
According to Snopes, which is not perfectly reliable, the missile was a Tomahawk, one of ours, but was likely a mistake, in that the girl's schools was near to a military (in particular, a naval base) target. That doesn't excuse it, but certain groups are known to place military operations under, near, and even inside civilian areas to maximize 'collateral damage'. More evidence of this will follow, but here's the Snopes sauce:
https://www.snopes.com/news/2026/03/03/iran-girls-school-missile-attack/
Sauce on other radical regimes doing similar actions follows:
Persia does have a unique history, agreed with you entirely!
And that history was stifled by the Ayatollahs, and the brutal reign they perpetuated:
We have news sources here ranging from Newsweek to the NYT to the Daily Mail agreeing on this, and even some Arabic sources covered the protests, regional fallout, and diplomatic tensions caused by the Ayatollah's actions:
I appreciated your thoughtful comment, and decided to add some sauce to the 'meat' to enhance it's flavor. Hopefully, it was successful.
Or a biblically done exorcism?
Trust the Real Science! Real Women Have XX Chromosomes! Real Men Have XY Chromosomes. Anything Else Is Cosplay or Worse.
I dissent! (ACB Possibly) Gorsuch? NO. You nominate a Libertarian -leaning Justice, you are the problem if you do not understand that he will be more bound by his principles than to siding with you on every case.
and a link of President Trump placing the blame for the shutdown on the Democrats, as well as Hakeem doubling down,, and Larry trying to vote as Kim Kardashian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkpKnaxgqVg
Thank you for the correction, Much obliged!
Whining was more accurate in this instance, thank you!
Thank You Very Much!
This is a Flashback to 2024, but particularly pertinent in light of the current partial shutdown.
Love all the pets!
Makes sense to me!
I can go for that interpretation as well! It might have been better for me to put 'President Trump's' in scare quotes to communicate this is either not the final plan, or a trial balloon!
Had a bit of fun with that :)
Spoken to the religious leaders, it really should have had an impact... Wait A Minute!
All through the book of Acts you see the Pharisees start to get it - It starts with Gamaliel warning the majority of the Sanhedrin, "be careful what you do to these men...." and ends with the Pharisees defending Paul while the Sadducees denounce him!
The Lamb of God returns as the Lion of the Tribe of Judah!
Depends on whose definition of Israel you use...
@ u/The_Greeat_Ship_Pilot I don't think that is what the issue is here, though I voted you up for a good question!:
-
We can't get to Heaven on our works, because our work misses the mark of both action and intent: See Matthew 5: 48 Even the Ten Commandments cannot both be kept in letter or spirit without the Holy Spirit.
-
There was always a way for those who committed unintentional sin to show repentance, both under the Law and under Grace. Jesus never rebuked anyone for keeping the Law, the rebuke was for prioritizing the traditions of man over the Law of God., and for not keeping it, while acting as if keeping it.
-
The Law of God serves three purposes:
a) To show us what God's standard of living is
b) To reveal to us our missing the mark of that standard
c) to point us to Jesus our Messiah and Lord, who did meet the standard perfectly!
-
As Paul points out in Romans 7, the Law as an overriding emphasis will cause your old sinful nature to come out in spades - and every other suit! This is why our focus is to be on Christ, and not on the Law in and of itself - and we know that the Law is not the problem, because Paul says the Law is holy, just and righteous .
-
We are the problem! As Pogo put it: "We have met the enemy, and he is us!" see point 4)
-
The context is in relation to fasting - NOT the Moral Law!:
Then the disciples of John came to Him, asking, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast, but Your disciples do not fast?”
And Jesus said to them, “The [fn]attendants of the bridegroom cannot mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them, can they? But the days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast. “But no one puts [fn]a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for [fn]the patch pulls away from the garment, and a worse tear results. “Nor do people put new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the wineskins burst, and the wine pours out and the wineskins are ruined; but they put new wine into fresh wineskins, and both are preserved.”
Thank you in advance, all readers of this comment for your patience with this rather long explanation. I appreciate all who take the time to read it!
u/#Correct