In this installment of my series dealing with a local small papers regular article, I respond to the misdirection of energies to ideas surrounding religious and political extremism. A proper understanding of both history and one’s own political leaders can direct... Read More
Well, my cruise to Hawaii and back went as well as one could expect. One of my favorite parts was being “buzzed” by the USS Vinson (Carrier) on our last sea day. Not only did we see a floating military airport, F-18′s, Sea-Hawks, and E-2C Hawkeyes… but we... Read More
Just a quick note on when John says (see below) that he doubts “the origin of homosexuality will be discussed,” he does not discuss it either (if there is even an “origin” to be discussed). And while I admit to not following John’s every... Read More
Now, before I post the exact same critique of the above “meme/quote” I placed on a friends mom’s FaceBook, I wish to note a few things about the “interaction” that followed. Firstly, this action taken by D.N. (friend’s mom) proves yet again... Read More
This is a short, 6-point reason why I believe same-sex marriage should not be “normalized” by society as a whole — THAT IS, gay-unions should not be placed in importance, culturally, as equal in its benefiting society. Gender differences are important and have... Read More
In all my discussions with people about the “hot-button issue” of today, same-sex-marriage, I see a theme. And that is, bias. Not an admitted bias, or a healthy bias, one flirting with fascism. “FASCISM! How can you say that Papa Giorgio!?” Easy, a... Read More
“Properly speaking, homosexuality does not exist among animals…. For reasons of survival, the reproductive instinct among animals is always directed towards an individual of the opposite sex. Therefore, an animal can never be homosexual as such. Nevertheless, the... Read More
I have been too busy as-of-late to keep up with “Concepts,” an article in a local small paper. This recent article did, however, peak my interest and awoke me from my slumber. (As usual, you can click the graphic to enlarge to be able to read the article if so... Read More
It is funny. In this conversation (which is part two, part one can be found here) I have noticed a theme… which is, the detractors in question will bring up topics of a religious bent, even going as far as quoting Scripture; then, when corrected on the theological or... Read More
I was graciously invited to a site that is a depot for many conservatively minded homosexuals as well as supporters of these Republican leaning folk. For the record there are many independents and libertarian leaning guys and gals in the group as well. The person that invited me... Read More
The savage jihadi who beheaded a British soldier on the street then approached a cameraman. He was still carrying the murder weapons and his hands were red with blood, and his victim was still lying in the street. He issued a dire warning. But the appeasers and apologists will keep on denying reality.
The horrific killing in Woolwich, where a man believed to be a soldier based at the nearby Woolwich barracks was beheaded by two machete-wielding assailants, has all the hallmarks of an al-Qaeda attack.
At the time of writing we are still awaiting confirmation from security officials about the precise nature of the incident. But having just watched some ITN footage, which shows a man with bloodied hands who is carrying a machete saying directly into the camera “We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you”, it seems pretty clear to me what has happened.
For years al-Qaeda activists such as Anwar al-Awlaki, the American-born cleric who preached global jidad from his base in Yemen until he was killed by a U.S. drone strike two years ago, have been calling on their followers to launch their own home-grown attacks.
Rather than trying to carry out sophisticated operations on the scale of the September 11 attacks, or the July 7 bombings in London in 2005, Awlaki urged his followers to take matters into their own hands and conduct basic attacks, such as launching suicide bomb attacks in British shopping centres, or attacking British military targets.
To date the intelligence and security services appear to have succeeded in disrupting these so-called homegrown plots, and a number of al-Qaeda terrorists have recently received lengthy jail terms. In one of these plots an al-Qaeda terrorist wanted to kidnap a British soldier in the Midlands and film himself beheading his captive.
Now it seems al-Qaeda has finally achieved its goal.
Real men, even when they fail, carry their own umbrellas… and do not force Marines to break their code of dress (http://tinyurl.com/bdtk66a). But, if you needed someone to stand in for your manhood, a Marine is a good choice. In fact, I know gay men who are more manly than Obama! @GayPatriot
I wanted to update this post just a bit with a challenge along similar veins by Bob Beckel on the Five, and Dana Perino’s response to his muddled thinking (the short exchange is HERE if you wish:
We all wait for other Democrats to do the same, as you see Bill Cunningham challenge Joe Trippi:
Bob Woodward compares to Watergate:
Back to the older response to an acquaintance:
Media Matters, a Soros funded org, has infected liberal blogs with what they feel is a good argument or response to both Democrats and Republicans wanting to know what the failure was in Benghazi, Libya and how 4-Americans can die when they requested help a month prior. Here is a cut-n-paste of it as it was presented to me on FaceBook:
2002 U.S. consulate-Karachi,Pakistan-Attacked-10 killed,51 injured 2004 U.S. Embassy bombed-Uzbekistan-2 killed,9 injured 2004 Gunmen storm U.S. consulate in Saudi Arabia-8 killed 2006 Armed men attack U.S. Embassy in Syria-1 killed,several injured 2007 Grenade launched into U.S. Embassy in Athens 2008 Bombings at U.S. Embassy in Yemen-10 killed 2012 U.S. Annex in Benghazi, Libya attacked-4 killed. Republicans outraged and suddenly concerned with the safety and security of American’s abroad. Now they demand investigations.
Years of discussing religion and politics has taught me to check out what is presented, so I at least (I do have a life) looked into the first two examples… and a patter emerged. Here are a couple of my responses to the above:
Suicide Bomber for your 2002 example, not a long, preplanned attack that more boots on the ground (that was both requested and called for earlier than the attack) could have prevented. IF in the 2002 Karachi, Pakistan attack they requested because they saw pre-planning on the terrorists part with additional intelligence an attack was eminent and they requested better fortified positions to stop vehicles (suicide attacks) from coming in [and these requests were denied], then I would be interested. Plus, NOT A SINGLE U.S. person died in the attack. All Pakistani. PLUS, even if U.S. personnel have died in an attack similar to Benghazi… they were most likely Marines protecting sovereign U.S. soil. The expectation of an ambassador is to be protected, not to fight. So your “well aware of the risks” argument is another conflated comparison.
You are creating straw-men arguments through conflation and non-sequiturs, and then comparing the two as if the same. Sloppy thinking Ross. No idea of the requested help a month before and during the attack. Dumb.
Here is the second example examined:
Your 2004 example of the U.S. consulate in Saudi Arabia-8 killed
(BBC — 2004) …A Saudi security source told Reuters news agency that heavy security had prevented the attackers from getting into the Jeddah consulate by car…. All Americans who were at the consulate are reported to be safe…. Correspondents say security around the consulate has been extremely tight since a series of bombings by Islamic militants in Saudi Arabia began in 2003, mainly targeting buildings that house foreigners. They add that the attack must have been very well planned, given the security measures…. The embassy and the mission in Dhahran had been closed as a precaution following the Jeddah attack…. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4071387.stm)
★ Many Defenses Due To Intel Because of Previous Attacks; ★ No Americans Died; ★ Other Sites Temporarily Closed Due To This Attack.
★ No Defenses Even Though Previous Attacks On This Site and Intel and Requests; ★ Security was Decreased; ★ Not Closed Temporarily Even Though Attacked, Intel Was Coming In, And 9/11 Date.
APPLES AND ORANGES ~ Compare to Benghazi:
The U.S. mission in Benghazi, at an “emergency meeting” less than a month before the Sept. 11 attack, drafted a contingency plan to suspend operations as security deteriorated — and in the near-term, recommended that consulate operations be moved to the CIA annex about a mile away, according to a classified cable reviewed by Fox News.
The State Department’s senior representative at the consulate told those at the Aug. 15 meeting that the security situation was “trending negatively” and reported “this daily pattern of violence would be the ‘new normal’ for the foreseeable future, particularly given the minimal capabilities” of the Libyan security forces.
With no apparent reason to believe conditions would improve, the cable notified the office of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the “Emergency Action Committee” was updating “Post’s tripwires in light of the deteriorating security situation … to include a ‘suspension of operations’ section.”
The term “tripwire” refers to lines in the sand which, if crossed, cover personnel levels, security measures, and in this case, the extreme step of suspending operations.
The cable marked “SECRET” also said, of the possibility of moving the consulate operations: “Mission personnel could co-locate to the Annex (CIA outpost) if the security environment degraded suddenly. … (There was agreement) to formal weekly meetings to discuss the security environment. … In the longer term, we believe formal collocation with the (Annex) will greatly improve our security situation.” The warnings reflected a grave concern among officials on the ground that the Libyan militia charged with protecting the consulate had been compromised, perhaps even infiltrated by extremists.
Summarizing the Aug. 15 meeting, the cable sent the following day reported that “certain sectors of the 17 February Brigade were very hesitant to share information with the Americans, but as the largest brigade they acted as a buffer for the Mission against some of the more anti-American, Islamist militias in town.” The brigade was charged with protecting the consulate.
Moving the consulate operations to the CIA annex might not have ultimately saved the four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, who died in the Sept. 11 strike. The annex ended up coming under fire and was the site where two of the four Americans were killed.
But the concerns in the cable — which also warned Washington that the consulate could not be protected in the event of a “coordinated attack” and that “approximately ten Islamist militias and AQ training camps” were known to operate within Benghazi — are further evidence that the U.S. mission in eastern Libya repeatedly warned Washington that they were a target.
The reference in the cable to the February 17 Brigade was significant.
This week, new documents recovered from the Benghazi compound by Foreign Policy magazine further support the classified cable’s prescient warning that the Libyan militia was compromised. In the early morning hours of Sept. 11, the consulate staff believed they were under surveillance. A document found by the magazine stated “this person was photographing the inside of the U.S. special mission and furthermore … this person was part of the police unit sent to protect the mission.”
This reporting is consistent with an online post from Sean Smith, an avid gamer, shortly before the consulate was overrun by terrorists and Smith was killed. As reported by Wired magazine shortly after the attack, Smith wrote: “Assuming we don’t die tonight. We saw one of our ‘police’ that guard the compound taking pictures.”
Days after the attack, an intelligence source on the ground in Libya told Fox News: “One thing for sure is that the 17 Brigade was nowhere to be found and the Americans were left on their own in the assault.” On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being very bad, the intelligence source said the consulate security was “A 10 — total security failure. Benghazi was known to be a major area for extremist activities. Militias’ loyalty is easily bought and sold. Deals with militia leaders are worth nothing.”
The cable also shows the consulate staff and CIA leadership in Benghazi agreed to work hand-in-glove, which included reviewing “emergency action plans” and addressing areas of collaboration. ….
Also, there is more info about what the annex was capable of:
Sources who have debriefed the team that was at the CIA annex the night of the attack in Benghazi say that the CIA operators from the Global Response Staff, or GRS, were equipped with Mark 48 machine guns and had two types of laser capability. Each weapon had both a “passive” as well as a “visible” laser that could be used against the Libyan attackers.
The presence of laser capability on the roof of the CIA annex confirms what Fox News sources that night in Benghazi originally said, which is that they had laser capability and for 5 hours and 15 minutes were wondering where the usual overhead air support was, especially since, according to this source, they radioed from the annex beginning as early as midnight asking for it.
The presence of lasers raises more questions about why air support was not sent to Benghazi even protectively once it became clear that the fighting had followed the CIA rescue team back to the annex.
U.S. military officials say they “thought the fighting was over” after the team left the consulate and that there was a lull in the fighting.
Fox News has learned the guns were fitted with PEQ-15 lasers. The “passive” laser is not visible to the naked eye but can help team members identify hostile forces when the shooter is wearing NODS, or Night Observation Device attached to their helmet. The visible laser system places a red dot on the attacker and warns the attacker not to shoot, encouraging them to flee the scene. U.S. troops often use the visible laser to scare children or other civilians who find themselves in the middle of combat activity. When civilians see the laser they often back off in order not to be shot.
The GRS team that was present at the CIA annex provided security for the CIA station, as they do around the world. They are highly trained in countersurveillance, close target reconnaissance and in depth reconnaissance. Enemy fighters have learned in Afghanistan and Iraq to use their cell phones to follow or intercept these “passive” lasers without having night vision or NODS.
The Annex team also had Ground Laser Designators, or GLD. This kind of laser equipment emits code and signal when there is overhead air support, unmanned aerial surveillance, drones or Spectre gunships, for instance.
A source present the night of the attack says that the GRS team that was defending the annex asked where the air support was at midnight. Former SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty were killed 5 hours and 15 minutes later.
I am on the fence about this… as much as I dislike Eric Holder and even think he could have done this particular job of national security a different way than taping records of hundreds of phones… you have to admit he was trying to stop a leak of major proportions. Powerline has an interesting take on the matter, and even with the egregious leaks against Bush, his attorney general did not investigate the pres:
….Yesterday former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said that the Bush administration once considered issuing the type of subpoena that the Justice Department issued against the AP, but ultimately opted against it. Did any Bush administration leak investigation expose the wrongdoers (other than those whose names appeared in the bylines of the Times articles)? I don’t think so.
The notorious national-security leaks that were featured on page one of the Times during the Bush administration seem to me to pale in comparison to the leaks involved in the AP story. Here is the original AP story of May 2012 that appears to have triggered the leak investigation in which the AP phone records were subpoenaed. (I found the AP story via Max Fisher’s comments on the investigation.) Here are the key paragraphs about the AP’s communications with the White House:
The AP learned about the thwarted plot last week but agreed to White House and CIA requests not to publish it immediately because the sensitive intelligence operation was still under way.
Once those concerns were allayed, the AP decided to disclose the plot Monday despite requests from the Obama administration to wait for an official announcement Tuesday.
The White House confirmed the story after the AP published it on Monday afternoon. Caitlin Hayden, the deputy national security council spokeswoman, said in a statement that Obama was first informed about the plot in April by his homeland security adviser John Brennan, and was advised that it did not pose a threat to the public.
Conor Fridersdorf takes a look at the subpoena of the AP phone records in the context of Holder’s characterization of the leak investigation. It seems to me that Friedersdorf raises a good question about the alleged harm caused by the AP story….
Here’s how the conversation went down [h/t Hot Air]:
Congressman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) said Wednesday during an interview on the Hugh Hewitt Show that the Justice Department’s investigation of the Associated Press involved obtaining phone records from the House of Representatives cloakroom.
HH: The idea that this might be a Geithner-Axelrod plan, and by that, the sort of intimation, Henry II style, will no one rid me of this turbulent priest, will no one rid me of these turbulent Tea Parties, that might have just been a hint, a shift of an eyebrow, a change in the tone of voice. That’s going to take a long time to get to. I don’t trust the Department of Justice on this. Do you, Congressman Nunes?
DN: No, I absolutely do not, especially after this wiretapping incident, essentially, of the House of Representative. I don’t think people are focusing on the right thing when they talk about going after the AP reporters. The big problem that I see is that they actually tapped right where I’m sitting right now, the Cloak Room.
HH: Wait a minute, this is news to me.
DN: The Cloak Room in the House of Representatives.
HH: I have no idea what you’re talking about.
DN: So when they went after the AP reporters, right? Went after all of their phone records, they went after the phone records, including right up here in the House Gallery, right up from where I’m sitting right now. So you have a real separation of powers issue that did this really rise to the level that you would have to get phone records that would, that would most likely include members of Congress, because as you know…
DN: …members of Congress talk to the press all the time.
HH: I did not know that, and that is a stunner.
DN: Now that is a separation of powers issue here, Hugh.
DN: And it’s a freedom of press issue. And now you’ve got the IRS going after people. So these things are starting to cascade one upon the other, and you have the White House pretending like they’re in the clouds like it’s not their issue somehow.
For those of you who don’t know what a congressional cloakroom is, it’s where U.S. lawmakers go to mingle, socialize, and relax between sessions. House and Senate cloakrooms have their own phone numbers. So if AP reporters were making calls to the House cloakroom, it appears the DOJ looked into those records, according to the congressman.
Marine Sergeant Anthony McDaniel was four months into his second deployment when he lost both of his legs and his left hand when he stepped on an IED in Kajaki, Afghanistan….
….Sgt McDaniel is grateful for the support of those who will help make his specially adapted home a reality. Not only will it allow him the peace of mind by knowing that he will have more freedom and independence in his own home, but in his words, “It will eliminate a lot of stress in my daily life, just by knowing that I do not need to worry about finding a home that will meet my needs and be a great place to raise my family. To all those who have been there for me…thank you for your unending support during my recovery…you keep me motivated to push harder.”
Please consider making or making a donation today!
During the campaign, the president could just get away with claiming he said “act of terror,” since he did use those words — though not in the way he often claimed. It seemed like a bit of after-the-fact spin, but those were his actual words — to the surprise of Mitt Romney in the debate.
But the president’s claim that he said “act of terrorism” is taking revisionist history too far, given that he repeatedly refused to commit to that phrase when asked directly by reporters in the weeks after the attack. He appears to have gone out of his way to avoid saying it was a terrorist attack, so he has little standing to make that claim now.
Indeed, the initial unedited talking points did not call it an act of terrorism. Instead of pretending the right words were uttered, it would be far better to acknowledge that he was echoing what the intelligence community believed at the time–and that the administration’s phrasing could have been clearer and more forthright from the start.
State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland raised specific objections to this paragraph drafted by the CIA in its earlier versions of the talking points:
“The Agency has produced numerous pieces on the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa’ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya. These noted that, since April, there have been at least five other attacks against foreign interests in Benghazi by unidentified assailants, including the June attack against the British Ambassador’s convoy. We cannot rule out the individuals has previously surveilled the U.S. facilities, also contributing to the efficacy of the attacks.”
In an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? Concerned …”
Formerly Skeptical BBC Editor Changes Tune (The Blaze):
BBC Editor Mark Mardell on Friday admitted that he had all but dismissed allegations of a Benghazi cover-up before ABC’s bombshell report on the Benghazi talking points, which were deliberately edited to remove references to terror.
“This is now very serious, and I suspect heads will roll,” Mardell writes. “The White House will be on the defensive for a while.”
The BBC editor said ABC’s report on the talking points provide the “first hard evidence that the State Department did ask for changes to the CIA’s original assessment.” He predicted that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will inevitably have to explain why her department made the significant edits.
“In the interests of full disclosure I have to say I have not in the past been persuaded that allegations of a cover-up were a big deal. It seemed to me a partisan attack based on very little,” Mardell admitted, later adding that the “evidence is there in black and white.”
He goes on: “Mr Obama’s critics are often not very clear what is behind their allegations. I presume they think that the White House wanted to avoid claims the murders were the result of terrorism because this would undermine his claim that al-Qaeda was seriously ‘degraded.’ There’s also a vague sense he’s ‘soft on terror.’”…
The above graphic comes from HotAir… they have good stuff over there! (Click to enlarge) Robert Spencer says “Chechnya is the Muslim area of the Caucasus that has been waging jihad against the Russians since the 19th century.”
Reportedly, Islamist terrorists have been active recruiting and training ethically European Muslims not only in Chechnya, but also in Albania and in the former Yugoslavian region of Bosnia-Herzegovina. (Examiner)
I called it! And I’m taking credit. I posted here at LR, and in the comments section of HotAir, that my strong guess was that they were from Chechnya. I also had a back-up guess that they could be Syrian, Turkish, Greek, Armenian, Albanian, but definitely that region of the world.
The suspects were identified to The Associated Press as coming from the Russian region near Chechnya, which has been plagued by an Islamic insurgency stemming from separatist wars.
Muslim terrorist attack in Boston, Massachusetts USA. 3 killed, 172 injured, many severely. The liberal-left, and even some in the anti-war/soft on terrorism wing within the libertarian movement are going to seriously have some explaining to do. Don’t worry.
UPDATE!! One of the brothers “lived in Turkey.” Was he trained there? A NATO ally now training Muslim rebels to kill Americans?
Pat Dollard posted this quote from Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis
“We believe this is a terrorist, we believe this is a man that’s come here to kill people,”
Watching surrounding of a house… Fox happens to be on scene.
Gateway Pundit has this tweet from a resident this morning. In another post, Gateway Pundit notes that after a photo was taken with Tamerlan Tsarnaev (the dead brother) and a girl, he said: “Tamerlan says he doesn’t usually take his shirt off so girls don’t get bad ideas: ‘I’m very religious’.” (Source)
Via Free Republic: The Boston bombers from Chechnya are most likely Sunni Muslims
Islam is the predominant religion in Chechnya. Chechens are overwhelmingly adherents to Sunni Islam, the country having converted to Islam between the 16th and the 19th centuries. Due to historical importance, many Chechens are Sufis, of either the Qadiri or Naqshbandi orders. Most of the population follows either the Shafi’i, Hanafi, or Maliki schools of jurisprudence, fiqh. The Shafi’i school of jurisprudence has a long tradition among the Chechens, and thus it remains the most practiced.
(Gateway posted this tid-bit) Dead Boston Bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev created a YouTube playlist devoted to Islamic terrorism.
HotAirposts this about a crazy “al-Qaeda prophecy” the older brother was into, he is the one who said “I don’t have a single American friend, I don’t understand them.”
Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the 26 year-old brother of the second Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, had a YouTube page where he posted religious videos, including a video of Feiz Mohammad, afundamentalist Australian Muslim preacher who rails against the evils of Harry Potter. Among those videos is one dedicated to the prophecy of the Black Banners of Khurasan which is embraced by Islamic extremists—particularly Al Qaeda. The videos posted on what appears to be Tsarnaev’s YouTube page may shed light on the motivations for the attack on the Boston Marathon. The prophecy states that an invincible army will come from the region of “Khurasan,” a large portion of territory in central Asia.
“This is a major hadith (reported saying of the prophet Muhammad) that jihadis use, it is essentially an end-time prophecy,” says Aaron Zelin, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy “This is definitely important in Al Qaeda’s ideology.” In The Black Banners, former FBI agent Ali Soufan’s book about his pursuit of Al Qaeda that is named after this prophecy, Soufan describes the prophecy this way:
Khurasan is a term for a historical region spanning northeastern and eastern Iran and parts of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and northwestern Pakistan. Because of the hadith, jihadists believe that this is the region from which they will inflict a major defeat against their enemies—in the Islamic version of Armageddon…
CAUTION, this is a link to a couple graphic photos of the damage done to spectators after the bomb blast (proceed with caution: HERE). The video above is a view of a runner when the first bomb blast happened. The following video is during a Fox News live broadcast. The gentleman in the *graphic* photo (linked) is seen here, quickly… because once Fox realized what they showed, they switched feed. I hope he lived… he looked conscious and aware.
Patriot's Day ~ Cannot Break Our Spirit
(CNN) — It didn’t take long Monday for speculation to ramp up online over the timing of the Boston Marathon bombings, which came on Patriots Day, a state holiday in Massachusetts and Maine marking the anniversary of the opening battles of the American Revolutionary War.
The American uprising against British authority in Lexington, Massachusetts, was on April 19, 1775, but Patriots Day is celebrated on the third Monday in April, falling this year on April 15.
“It’s a day that celebrates the free and fiercely independent spirit that this great American city of Boston has reflected from the earliest days of our nation,” President Obama said Monday, a few hours after a pair of bombs rocked the finish line of the Boston Marathon, killing at least three and injuring dozens more.
For many New Englanders, it is a day of pride that comes with historical re-enactments, the Boston Marathon, baseball and a day off for schools and government employees.
It’s now a day that will go down in history along with other violent U.S. incidents in April, including the 1993 FBI siege of David Koresh’s compound in Waco, Texas, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, a mass shooting at Columbine High School in 1999 and the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007.
The Waco siege and the Oklahoma City bombing fell on April 19, the actual anniversary of the Battles of Lexington and Concord. To some people following Monday’s bombing online and through social media, the proximity of Monday’s incident to those anniversaries was enough to suggest an act of domestic terrorism…. (read more)
Also be aware we, as a country, have been here before. I speak of the Haymarket Massacre (seven police officers killed and at least four civilians); the Bath School Massacre (36 school children and 2 teachers were killed; During rescue efforts at the school, searchers discovered an additional 500 pounds of unexploded dynamite and pyrotol connected to a timing device set to detonate at the same time as the first explosions); the Opelousas Massacre (Democrats massacred nearly 300 African-American Republicans in Opelousas, Louisiana), etc. We got through those as a country, we will get through this.
One of his [JayZ's] heroes is Che Guevara. Che Guevara was a racist. Che Guevara was a racist that wrote extensively about the superiority of white Europeans over people of African descent, so he should inform himself on the guy that he’s propping up.
“Secondly, I think if Jay-Z was truly interested in the true state of affairs in Cuba, he would have met people that are being oppressed, including a hip-hop artist in Cuba who is right now being oppressed and persecuted and is undergoing a hunger strike because of his political lyrics,” Rubio added.
“And I think he missed an opportunity. But that’s Jay-Z’s issue.”
Biased: I have my own interests and personal beliefs in mind when talking to others, spiritually or politically (Proverbs 21:2; Matthew 15:19); Fallen: I am a sinner and tend towards ~ naturally ~ what is not best for me or others. In other words, I will probably let you down (Romans 3:10; 3:23; Lamentations 5:16); Sentenced: since I tend towards rebellion and selfishness, I am judged accordingly and righteously (Romans 5:12; 6:23a; Job 36:6); Forgiven: I am justified before God not through works but by faith (Galatians 2:16; Romans 6:23b; Psalm 86:5); Relational:mercy is not getting what you deserve. And grace is getting what you absolutely do not deserve (Hebrews 4:16; Ephesians 1:5; Jeremiah 15:19a).
Some Questions About Evolution that Should Be Exhumed
The Chinese were prodigious historians, crafting their language to draw scenes from history, and then combing these pictures into more complex ideas. These offer great apologetic evidences for the Genesis account of history, separate from the Bible.