Uh...the actual headline for the article was "White House Denies Decision Over Ending Legal Status of 240,000 Ukrainians." How is it possible for the title to turn into something completely different from a copy-and-paste? No matter now, except that the article was a nothingburger. I even regret saying anything.
Let me get this straight...you took the word of 3 anonymous Reuters "sources" over a direct denial from the Trump administration? And you are standing on it?
I'm a little more attuned to the accent, but this guy talks like he has a shoe in his mouth. He wants to be Robert Mugabe but hasn't the suit or the diction.
You really ought to either withdraw this post or correct the headline from what it misleadingly says.
Judah / Judea...you are quibbling over phonetics. It's the same name. And Pilate was referring to the people, as there was no identified polity. (The satrap-kingship of Herod was for a geographic polity.) When someone objected to him applying that cognomen, he replied "That is what he said." (I think the "and fuck you" was in the undertone.) The Latin was recorded.
The Babylonian Jews (or Hebrews, if you prefer) were restored to their homeland by Cyryus, where their first order of business was to restore the ruined Jerusalem. The Edomites were not worth mentioning. They did not build anything.
You are submerged in your fantasy, so I cannot do much to lift you out of it. Whenever you run into an obstacle, you resort to "the Jews did it." Even if what you claim they did makes no sense to you. If your theory makes no sense to you...why do you give it any thought? And if you believe the Bible is a lie, you are not possibly a Christian, correct?
From a practical perspective, NATO has already been defeated. Ukraine was the Golden Child of NATO training and equipment and hoopla. All obliterated, with a nation in ruins, and beflagged cemeteries on the size of municipalities. The latest NATO moves were the provision of Storm Shadow / SCALP (British/French) missiles----which are totally dependent on U.S. targeting information, which Trump has turned off. Now, expensive junk. NATO has emptied its armories to be destroyed on Ukrainian territory. Chieftain and Challenger tanks are celebrated by the Russians as battlefield trophies. What do the UK and French have left? And what happens when Russia sends Oreshnik missiles at UK and French military centers, or cities? I rather think the tide of public opinion would be "greatly clarified and strengthened."
I construe this as an overweening, yet desperate, ploy to intimidate Trump into submission. One only has to put it into words to force out a laugh.
I don't think NATO treaty obligations are operative if NATO starts a war (non-defense) or alleges a defensive war on account of what happens to a non-member.
The message to Zelensky should be: "You lost, fair and square. It is over. If you don't accept peace on those terms, you will be destroyed."
You are reading into the Bible much that is not there, and omitting much that is there. "The nations" is a phrase that dates from the early Old Testament, prior to Rome. It referred to groupings of a people. Jesus, speaking to Jews, would of course be using that understanding. There is nowhere in the Bible where the word of Gospel is withheld from anyone upon Jesus' final command. ("Gentile" commonly referred to "Greek" based on who was really more to be found.) I don't find "goy" or "goyim" in my translations of the Bible, and it is not taught.
We don't read the Bible in the original languages. A Jew would be someone who was Judean, which was the part of the Kingdom that remained after the partition into Israel and Judea, which included the areas of Jerusalem, the Sea of Galilee, and other locations of the New Testament.
You can make fanciful assertions about how "the Jews" tinkered with the New Testament, but they are only that. The Book of Hebrews is not the "Book of the Jews." When Pontius Pilate enscribed the declaration of Jesus on the crucifixion, it was IESUS NAZARANVS REX IVDAEORVM, "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews." I.e., of the local long-dwelling inhabitants. I doubt "the Jews" had tampered with Pilate's inscription.
I think I predicted this. Loss of overhead imagery will be a big hindrance to Ukrainian ground operations. Effectively blinding them. It is a 20th-century mentality that thinks all you need are weapons and troops. In the 21st-century, it all hinges on command, control, communications, intelligence, and battle management (C3IBM). The Russians may be sharing a glass of champagne.
What is a blind octopus? A flop-topus.
After his resurrection, Jesus commanded his Apostles to go forth and preach the Gospel to "all nations," Gentile and Jew alike. You miss a lot when you omit the Book of Acts. The Jews were never excluded (thus, the Book of Hebrews, written for the edification of erstwhile Jews).
You don't judge a 2-hour movie by the first 5 minutes.
Dire. Spruce is a conifer, and dry conifers qualify as pure kindling.
Meanwhile...the Russians advance.
Those who whistle past the graveyard should be concerned they wake the dead.
Apparently not. "Starmer" is a Scottish nickname-surname for "star." The German word for "storm" is "sturm."
And DJ gets to hug Trump. In later life, "Do you realize, when I was thirteen, I got to hug President Trump when he made me a member of the Secret Service?" speaking to his grandkids, when Trump will be a modern legend.
You stop and think about it: hugging is what family members do, whether blood-related or in acquaintanceship. The "we are family" feeling has long been missing in public life, where virtue consists of "fighting." Thank God, it seems to be the undertide of the MAGA movement.
Very good catch. I just took it as a miscellaneous rhetorical gesture. I didn't appreciate the "geographical" context. I have to think that some of the Dems (those guilty) felt their neck hairs rise.
That's all? They left out the missile attack on the civilian rail station in Kramatorsk, blamed on Russia, but executed with identified Ukrainian weapon. Or the Bucha Massacre, blamed on temporary Russian occupation troops, but rumored to be a setpiece arranged by MI6 with corpses freshly provided by Azovite hit squads.
Well, she's 84 years old with hard mileage (lots of alcohol = brain erosion). I think she is just reduced to the point where she is barely functional physically and is exerting herself mainly to be in attendance. She just looks uncomfortable. It would be a real question whether Trump's words actually went over her head.
P.S. I read the article without my glasses (again) and came to the realization that "lawmakers" can be misread as "lawn rakers." You're welcome!
The first example was arguably 2001's "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within." The problem they faced was the high expense and time required to render the high-fidelity images. But although it is very realistic...it is not real...and that is easily noticed by the viewer. More recent work is convincing, so long as they don't push the human mimicry very hard. Human beings have more individuality. I think there is more to be had in background and setting synthesis, as in 2004's "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow," by Kerry Conran. For whatever reason, it didn't light a fire, which I think is a shame. (A lot of recent work relies on "motion capture" from an actual actor. The usual example is Andy Serkis playing Gollum in the "Lord of the Rings" movies.)
...her last legs?
The rest of this agreement is worth comment. Items (i), (ii), and (iii) will doom Ukraine to an energy death. Item (v) may include nuclear weapons and uranium enrichment.
It is an Address to Congress, not a State Of The Union. This is actually typical for new terms of president.
Very commendable post. But there has been a rash of this impatient tantrumizing on GAW in the past few days. So much, that I have had to scold them for "dooming," which is ironic considering the labeling I have experienced.
My motto has become: It is a Movie, not a Wet Dream.
No, I can't understand a totally childish reaction to a real-world process, where the process is part of the reveal. That is the point you are missing, and it is the crucial element in drawing public attention. In the real world, there are such things as missed deliveries and unplanned events. It doesn't get anyone off the hook, but it does interfere with schedules. It just tells me how well connected such complaints are to the real world. Go ahead---get in a big snit, a big huff...and see where that gets you: nowhere. Meanwhile, I expect the public will be curious about why the problems in pulling teeth. And we get to "out" some more of the trash.
As for Parkes, if there is no 2 or 3 sentence abstract of the point he wants to make, I have no interest in wasting an hour and a half on "dude, check out this video." Especially if he is an alien half-breed (or whatever).
But as for the Q quotation, I have real questions and misgivings about the end sentence: "Much will be revealed, we want transparency but not at a cost we can't recover from." We want to see the truth...but not the most crucial aspects of truth? And who is to shield us from the truth? And why? And when we have demonstrated human ability to survive world wars, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, diseases, countless family tragedies---what information is so cataclysmic we can't "recover" from it? This implies that the gatekeepers---and only them---are capable of "recovering" from the truth. It further implies that any attempt to paraphrase this information is equally as deadly as the information itself. The only thing I can imagine coming even remotely close to this level of peril is classified information, but after 40 years of working with highly classified and compartmented material, I can certify that it is not that perilous to be aware of. In that case, it is always a question of whether the classified activity can survive disclosure, not whether the person to whom it is disclosed can survive the knowledge.
My candid reaction to that sentence is "Bullshit!" I would like to be more elegant, but the offense to history and human nature is intolerable. If there is a flaw at the heart of the Q operation, it is a complete lack of faith in the truth.
Now, it could be that this is only a inept way to allude to classified systems and operations, without which all our national defense could be jeopardized. I am okay with classified information withheld for that purpose, since I have exposure to it and know why it is classified. This puts the highest premium on placing responsible and trustworthy people in charge of it.
But the sentence is written to allow the interpretation that this pertains to persons and actions. Presumably of criminals and crimes so hideous they cannot be borne...or believed? Failure to disclose the depth of evil is a failure to prompt us all to repentance. Failure to disclose also deprives us of the righteousness in applying condign punishment.
I keep coming back to my thesis that these modern political problems are actually a challenge in mass psychological aberration, mostly amoral psychosis, involving narcissism, delusions of grandeur, and solipsism. When truth collides with psychosis, the patients' delusions either collapse, and then they recover---or they harden into a complete psychotic break. It is from this that I think Q advises that it will "not be for everyone." And maybe the lost souls are part of the "unrecovery" being alluded to. But I am not willing to relent on truth. As a line of dialogue from a contemplated story put it: "Man, the reason these people are having bad trips is because they are BAD PEOPLE." It is all so true, when a person decides to commit to a life based on lies instead of a life based on truth. We like to think that the deepest mental problems are only impersonal sicknesses, for which we are not willfully responsible. But the opposite is true. They are the manifestations of a moral choice toward falsehood, which leads only to a deranged view of life and how to live. (There are neurological afflictions such as schizophrenia or bipolar syndrome, but they are more like someone knocking on your mind with a mallet. Disturbing, unpleasant, disorienting, which in the extreme can unbalance a person to the limits of self-possession. What we are facing here is not the effect of such afflictions, but the effects of willful choices about what to think and how to act.)