Obama, the antichrist ?

[tdawnaz]

For one reason we are armed because law enforcement can't be everywhere at once.

I don't think they can be in the UK either.Or is law enforcement on the spot to stop every crime ?

So UK citizens have no need to be armed for the above reason.

i don't think that's what he was talking about...he was talking about the fact that our constitution says that we CAN be armed.

antagonistic posts are not necessary...

[Sequoia]

I wasn't intended to be antagonistic.It is an explanation of a couple of reasons the Constitution gives a citizen the right to bear arms.Since it was implied that this was because of " so much hate in America" & that sure wasn't the reason for the second amendment.The connotation of the post is there is something wrong with Americans bearing arms .

I mostly wanted to post this since "seperation of church & state" has been posted .I copied it all from other web sites but agree with it for the most part.

It shows that the framers of the Constituion & the earlier Supreme Court had a different opinion.

It is long & with references.Read it if you like or just skip it.

Recently, there have been objections to public religious expressions by legislative chaplains supported through State

budgets. These objections to legislative chaplains are very similar to one lodged with the U. S. Congress in 1852. In that

challenge, the Committees on the Judiciary in both the House and the Senate each delivered a report pertinent to this

discussion.

For example, in the House Report on March 27, 1854, it noted:

There certainly can be no doubt as to the practice of employing chaplains in deliberative bodies previous to the adoption

of the Constitution. We are, then, prepared to see if any change was made in that respect in the new order of affairs. . .

. On the 1st day of May [1789], Washington

[tommie gorman]

I think Im going to leave this thread.  It was fun for a while, but not we're just pissing eachother off....

Excitable, maybe. Pissed off? I doubt it. Not me anyway. 

[Roco]

For one reason we are armed because law enforcement can't be everywhere at once.

I don't think they can be in the UK either.Or is law enforcement on the spot to stop every crime ?

So UK citizens have no need to be armed for the above reason.

I know law enforcement isn't able to do that here.Armed citizens who are ready & willing to use their arms usually stop the crime being attempted against them.The ones killed with their own arms weren't ready & willing.

The next reason is if the government gets enough out of hand we the people are supposed to use our arms if necessary to get the government back in line.

I think the Texas state Constitution puts it well .This part is attributed to Sam Houston.

btw what does G/D mean ?

Thanks for the insight Sequoia , (  Btw GD =general discusion ) as it is the portal to the world for TMN ,and the stats are still dropping , my main concerne is the aim of terroism is to destablize the goverment of the attacked country , a form of sowing the seed of discontent  , it is a proved, cost efective way of winning ,the only efective form of defence is to turn the other cheek , hard enough to do , but it then throws back the message that it didn't hurt , no reaction is the  finish of the attacker ,  but throw a bomb back and kill one  terorist  and a dozen will spring up to take his place , just my thoughts

I do some times forget your president is a queen ,

Our Prime Minister is just that , the number one minister , and could  be fired at anytime , the military is under the comand of the Queen , the Queen could suspend parliment at any time it got out of hand , but then you could argue the Brits live under a herditary dictatorship ,  if push came to shove , LOL , most UK folk would stand by our Queen on that ,   

Our Police are unarmed , we have a total of around 70 gun related deaths a year ,

mostly due to Drug gangs figthting over an area ,, well It saves the taxpayer footing the jail cost ,

and with a camera on very street corner ( one to every 14 Brits ) the police can put their feet up and have a coffee back at the yard  ,

[ghostmaster]

.

The error was to see if ghostmaster would catch it since he was posting about the Abrahamic decedent line.

It wasn't something hard to decipher like post #62 may have been to some people.

What purposely wrong info did you post?

[mudmanc4]

What purposely wrong info did you post?

I was wondering that myself.

Because i do skim through the forever winded posts , besides like i said, unless your a scholar on the subject, and have studied all the convenient changes throughout the ages in the bible, who would know what was implanted as truth or what.

[ghostmaster]

Thanks for the insight Sequoia , (  Btw GD =general discusion ) as it is the portal to the world for TMN ,and the stats are still dropping , my main concerne is the aim of terroism is to destablize the goverment of the attacked country , a form of sowing the seed of discontent  , it is a proved, cost efective way of winning ,the only efective form of defence is to turn the other cheek , hard enough to do , but it then throws back the message that it didn't hurt , no reaction is the  finish of the attacker ,  but throw a bomb back and kill one  terorist  and a dozen will spring up to take his place , just my thoughts

I do some times forget your president is a queen ,

Our Prime Minister is just that , the number one minister , and could  be fired at anytime , the military is under the comand of the Queen , the Queen could suspend parliment at any time it got out of hand , but then you could argue the Brits live under a herditary dictatorship ,  if push came to shove , LOL , most UK folk would stand by our Queen on that ,   

Our Police are unarmed , we have a total of around 70 gun related deaths a year ,

mostly due to Drug gangs figthting over an area ,, well It saves the taxpayer footing the jail cost ,

and with a camera on very street corner ( one to every 14 Brits ) the police can put their feet up and have a coffee back at the yard  ,

If that is the case, then everything I was taught in school about the UK is completely wrong.  I was taught that the royal family had no power, and that all power remained in Parliament.  Figures....what does that say about our educational system?

Mudman, I think that was his point.  Im no expert either.  THe only thing I can think of was the date he posted about when Islam was founded.

And for the record, I didn't say I was pissed.  Thats not to say im not annoyed, but it would take a lot more than this conversation to piss me off.

[mudmanc4]

If that is the case, then everything I was taught in school about the UK is completely wrong.  I was taught that the royal family had no power, and that all power remained in Parliament.  Figures....what does that say about our educational system?

  Man am i glad this came up !!!!!!! 

They re write history as they see it, several generation go by, then bam, it changes in text.   real nice. Just like in Iran,  ( I could be wrong, I will verify this )   they have taken the holocaust out of the textbooks, and claim it never happened , figure that one out.

EDIT :Roco, can you tell us about the issues in the UK as far as teaching , or denying the holocaust, i would like to know the truth.

[mudmanc4]

Oh shit, take a break and watch this bad boy, stupid, but hell, why not , besides, if you don't watvh it all the way through, you can't have any candy anymore !!!!! :haha: :haha:

[coknuck]

That cracks me up every time I see it.

[ghostmaster]

I almost shot the first person that sent me that video.  I have hated the name Charlie ever since.....then again, my loser step father was named Charlie, maybe thats why....

[mudmanc4]

I almost shot the first person that sent me that video.  I have hated the name Charlie ever since.....then again, my loser step father was named Charlie, maybe thats why....

:haha:  That would have an effect wouldn't it?  :haha:

[Sequoia]

What purposely wrong info did you post?

For ghostmaster & mudmanc4 :

In post # 46 & # 53 I posted that Isaac was also known as Israel.He was not it was Isaac's son Jacob that was also known as Israel & the father of the twelve tribes of Israel.

[ghostmaster]

You're right, I didn't catch that.  Though i've been out of Sunday school for a long time lol.....I forgot all about the wrestling story.....

[tdawnaz]

[coknuck]

You should check this out!

[tommie gorman]

Amen.     

[Sequoia]

I would amen most of it but again there have not been slaves in the USA for 500 years.Do the math.

The most they can blame the USA for is from about 1789 to 1860.That is 71 years.

After that blacks weren't slaves.The faced discrimination after that but were no longer slaves.

[mudmanc4]

You have to stop and think who are the slaves now ? 

The people that work are the slaves for this country, the ones who refuse to make something of themselves, generation after generation, stay on public assistance for so many years, there great grand children are on it, because thats a way of life for them.

Great vid BTW coknuck   

[ghostmaster]

500 years?  Slavery ended in the 19th century in the US.  Thats less than 200 years ago.

But other than that, I agree.

[Roco]

so where did you buy your slaves from , Right , good old Great Britain , we ain't pure on that , as  John Lennon said  , "Think on ,we are all F*@king  slaves" , but think back ,where our great grandpareants slaves   ?  , so who do we blame for our misfortune's ? ,

I guess it is self inflicted greed ,  does having the latest must have item , fuel our problems and are we happy after we have acquired our hearts desire ?

, aparently not acording to the sueveys I have read ,

LOL just my idle thoughts ,

For me, all I wish is for is  a truly usefull Christmas present , no more socks please ,

is it to much to ask for Tdawnaz   wraped up in a pink bow ..;...

[scdreamin3]

Methinks this James David Manning is quite the Controversialist.  I don't really know what to think to be honest. Here's from another end of the controversy.

????

[Sequoia]

This is to show that the US government  has not always practiced "separation of church & state" .

I know the force was still being used to remove the children to these boarding schools as late as 1945 & probably later.American Indian children were forceably taken from their families & put in these schools.To "take the Indian "out of them.Where was the Supreme Court ?Certainly not there deciding to separate church & state.

This is the first decision of the Supreme Court I know of separating church & state.I guess it didn't apply to American Indians.

In 1947, in the case Everson v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court declared, "The First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."

An Indian boarding school refers to one of many schools that were established in the United States during the late 19th century to educate Native American youths according to Euro-American standards. These schools were primarily run by missionaries. It has been documented that they were traumatic to many of children who attended them, as they were forbidden to speak their native languages, taught Christianity instead of their native religions and in numerous other ways forced to abandon their Indian identity and adopt European-American culture. There are also documented cases of sexual, physical and mental abuses occurring at these schools by the US government.

Attendance in Indian boarding schools generally grew throughout the first half of the 20th century and doubled in the 1960s (10). Enrollment reached its highest point in the 1970s. In 1973, 60,000 American Indian children are estimated to have been enrolled in an Indian boarding school (10; 11). Several events in the late 1960s and mid-1970s (Kennedy Report, National Study of American Indian Education, Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975) led to more emphasis on community schools. Many large Indian boarding schools closed in the 1980s and early 1990s. In 2007, 9,500 American Indian children lived in an Indian boarding school dormitory (9). This includes 45 on-reservation boarding schools, 7 off-reservation boarding schools and 14 peripheral dormitories (9). From 1879 to the present day, hundreds of thousands of American Indians are estimated to have attended an Indian boarding school (12).

So why allow this & make a ruling about prayer in public school or suspend a student for carrying a Bible.Which is the greater violation?

so where did you buy your slaves from , Right , good old Great Britain , we ain't pure on that

I had to think in English to a couple of minutes to understand that.It means The British Empire shares the quilt of slavery,

I can't say the Brits sold all the black slaves to their colonies in what would eventually be the USA.I know other nations did.

However those colonies were a part of the British Empire before the American Revolutionary War was won in 1783.

If the British Empire had not allowed this slavery to become established it would not have been a problem for the framers of the US Constitution.Who believed all men(people ) were created equal.

The problem was the Constitution had to be ratified by states that had many slave owner's.The new type government had to get created & established to have the power to stop slavery.It did this in about 71 years.A lot less time than the British Empire allowed black slavery in the colonies.

So I do put a great deal of blame on the British Empire for the black slavery & problems the USA still has from it.

No wonder George Washington refused to be made a king.I don't think George Bush would have refused.The idea of any person being "royal" & thus superior bloodline was an anathema to Washington & should be to all Americans.

[mudmanc4]

I got this email today and thought it may fit here, if nothing else, its full of information.

          How  Long Do We Have until the vote?

                  About  the time our original thirteen states adopted

their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history

professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall

of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:

                  'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply

cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'

                  'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time

that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the

public treasury.'

                  'From that  moment on, the majority always vote for the

candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with

the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose

fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.'

                  'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations

from the beginning of history, has been about  200 years'.

                  'During those 200 years, those nations always

progressed through the following sequence:>

                     

                        1. From bondage to spiritual faith;

                      2. From spiritual faith to great courage;

                      3. From courage to liberty;

                      4. From liberty to abundance;

                      5. From abundance to complacency;

                    6. From complacency to apathy;

                  7. From apathy to dependence;

                      8. From dependence back into bondage'

                  Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of

Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning

the 2000 Presidential election:

                  Number of States won by:

                      Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29

                  Square miles of land won by:

                    Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000

                  Population of  counties won by:

                      Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million

                  Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by:

Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1

                  Professor Olson adds:

                      'In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican

won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of this great

country.  Democrat territory  mostly encompassed those citizens living in

government-owned  tenements and living off various forms of government

welfare...'

                      Olson believes the United States is now somewhere

between the 'complacency and apathy' phase of Professor Tyler's

definition of democracy, with some  forty percent of the nation's

population already having  reached the 'governmental dependency' ph

                If  Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty

million criminal invaders called illegal's and they vote, then we can

say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five year

                  Apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

[tdawnaz]

sequoia...u post alot of "facts" and "figures"...u wanna post ur source?? or were these all guesstimates

it would be nice if u posted where u get ur info...