Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Quatro
My my vienna has teeth to fight back with
At least I got you to read your bible (online that is)
I will turn the other cheek and post the truth:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachels.../#1e1c62f21b69
KEY FACTS
Today's bible study is seed thought to end these riots in NA
‘Do not be afraid nor dismayed because of this great multitude, for the battle is not yours, but God’s'. 2 Chronicles 19:15 |
God Lord, did you even read the full link you posted...,
at all? Here's the very first paragraph:
Quote:
TOPLINE
After a storm of criticism, the Trump campaign on Tuesday argued that police officers didn’t use tear gas on a group of protesters the day before in Lafayette Square before the president appeared for a photo-op—but that appears to not be false: police did admit to using a pepper irritant, which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control classifies as a type of tear gas.
|
The article isn't supporting the claim no tear gas was used at all; its stating the police and military on site did in fact use chemical weapons to clear the way for the grand entrance of president Chump. Trying to split hairs over whether it was tear gas or pepper spray or some other chemical is ludicrous; its like arguing someone who was shot dead is really dead because the reports were he was shot with a .38 and the wound that killed him was a .45; the caliber doesn't matter, the effect is the same, he's dead, and being gassed with tear gas or with pepper spray isn't a significant difference unless you are trying to tap dance your way to excusing the idiocy of Trump and his minions...
The article is
not a vindication of the story line Trump's trying to to foist on his gullible Trumpette lemmings; to the contrary, it goes on to bolster the claims of excessive use of force and abuse of power...
And there is this pithy bit you quoted:
Quote:
A Trump campaign spokesman asked media outlets, including Forbes, to retract stories stating that tear gas was used to clear a group of protesters so President Donald Trump could participate in a photo-op in front of a church Monday.
The spokesman pointed to a statement from the U.S. Parks Police, which said officers did not use tear gas and instead deployed “smoke canisters and pepper balls” on a group of “combative” protesters after they “continued to throw projectiles, and attempted to grab officers’ weapons.”
|
I mentioned Fox News in an earlier post and the raking over the coals they are taking for reporting what you bolded in your quote; a very large number of persons have noted, and in some cases, have used actual Fox News footage and reportage to prove the protestors were neither threatening nor combative; the footage taken just prior to the troops/police opening fire and following on through the rest of the incident shows clearly the protestors were either sitting around or standing around in peaceful order and really rather quiet; Fox News has neither responded to the questions about why their own footage differs so drastically with the story they tried to push on Trump's behalf. Not even Fox News can produce anything to back up the Trump Administration's lies...
As far as the first paragraph of your quote, the ask for retraction has been met with barely concealed amusement by the news media; I have seen the retraction ask noted in a couple of other reports on the incident and no retractions were made; in fact, one news outlet made a pointed remark at the end of their reportage that no retraction was to be made by them; and there is this from the very link you provided:
Quote:
|
The conservative website The Federalist published a story Tuesday declaring the media “falsely claimed” tear gas was used against protesters—which Trump then retweeted—but no major media outlet has issued a retraction.
|
(Bolding mine)
Please note the Forbes article you linked likewise did not offer a retraction; the silence is deafening...
Perhaps you can provide a cite of a major news source making a full retraction of the claims...?...
A far as reading the Bible, I have indeed read the the Bible, cover to cover several times; remember, I have in the past noted I spent nine (9) years in Catholic school and, whaddaya know, they made us read the Bible...often; whodda thunk...?...
...and, at one point in my younger years, gave very serious consideration to becoming a Jesuit, but any hypocrisy I may be inhabited with does know its limits; oddly, I now find myself living alone, almost always dressed in black, and given to self-contemplation, so maybe I have become a Jesuit after all...
I have also read the Torah, the Koran, a number of Eastern religious writings and have enjoyed discussing those writings with various clergy of various faiths; I am not a religious scholar nor do I make any claim to be at all, but I have tried to seek out the why of how people believe what they believe and I neither disparage their beliefs nor do I try to persuade them they are wrong in their beliefs and they, in turn, have pretty much extended me the same courtesy; one thing I can say about those experiences is they were able, each in their own way, to teach me a lot...
I'm still waiting on your cite for that "biblical quote' you made in the past and saw fit to PM me about when I called you on it; maybe its just not in your version of the Bible, eh?...
..and about God's battles: I'm pretty sure God can fight his own and I'm even more sure the very last person he would enlist to help him is a lying, deceitful, adulterer who is an overly prideful, vain, greedy, blasphemous mega-sinner who takes His name in vain like Trump...
...unless you can find a Bible quote to prove otherwise...
<O>