You might want to re-read your bible (I refuse to capitalize it).

Revelation 19:6:

And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.

Also Matthew 19:26 “with God, all things are possible” and Luke 1:37 “with God nothing is impossible” make it clear the Christian god is omnipotent without actually using the word.

And even if it wasn't explicitly written, in practice every major sect of Christianity follows the doctrine that the Christian god is both omniscient (i.e. going to judge everyone for their sins on judgement day) and omnipotent (i.e. can do anything, such as create a universe from nothing).

EDIT: So @newtboy's original comment stands. The bible's inconsistencies are too huge for anyone not completely indoctrinated into Christianity to ignore.

This is not necessarily on topic, but good grief i never realised pictures of someone's face could look so different. The bit at 1:37 with the woman's face was a revelation! I didn't know that happened, and it kind of explains some pictures i've accidentally taken with forward facing cameras (and been horrified by). I always thought i must have good/bad days and look terrible sometimes, but that explains a lot.

In Thailand i had a picture taken on a tree-platform-zipline 80 feet in the air, sweaty, red, disheveled and sleepless... and it's the best picture i've ever seen of me, and my skin looked uniform and nice, not red and damp as it did in a mirror there. Sorry for off-topic, but how the feck does that work? It wasn't airbrushed or anything, they had very little time for processing. I feel like 50% of my mystery has been answered in that one moment of the video!

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Well I loved it. And I don't think he's a mediocre vocalist. He really has a great voice and fantastic mic control.

Also, the way he did this one, cutting back and forth was really a revelation. Now that "She knows" line actually makes sense to me. *promote

And then Christians wonder or get upset that I think Christianity is a sham... got to love the "Foremost expert on terrorism" on the one guy. As I've said before, even if I was still a Christian, at this point I'd be 99% sure the whole Republican movement is part of the Anti-Christ movement. It is the Christians after all that need deceived, not the rest of the already Hell bound world. What better way to deceive them, than to make them stand up for everything Jesus stood against, while standing against everything He stood for, all the while proclaiming how they alone were the true Christians the way the Republican/Christian right claim. As a bonus, they make Christianity so vile, it repeals anyone away from even considering Christianity, when it's most public image isn't one of love and acceptance that Jesus taught, but of bigotry and hate that is at the core of the right today. But I know these sort of people, both sides of my family are it, and they think the rest of the world is being deceived, that the Democrats practice a fake Christianity ("if you read the Bible you couldn't be Democrat, you'd have to be Republican" never considering that Democrat Christians say the same thing but reversed) and that we are clearly in the end times, which is why global warming doesn't matter, as Jesus will be back long before we can do any real harm... plus Revelations talks about the bad weather in the end times anyhow.

I 100% regret every second of my life that was wasted being such a person as these, and believing their filthy lies... and for most of these televangelist and Fox news types, they know they are lying, not just deluded, which the smaller preachers and many in the faith are.

I'd say more, but I shouldn't really watch these videos, it just fuels my anger at them, and then I have a hard time focusing on the actual good in the world.

First-off, I completely agree, but mostly because of your first point about assault and the generalisation that it's currently something that would freak a lot of people out.

I think it will be great when society comes to a point where it's acceptable that someone might have transitioned. At (or approaching) that time I think it's something that a partner should generally know. Having said that, I certainly don't think it should be an obligation.

My present-day analogy is divorce... it's now acceptable to most people to be involved with someone who's divorced, but it's not something that's always discussed as a relationship blooms. However, it is an important part of a person's past that says something about them, and if it comes out far later in the relationship that says something too.

The mirror of this is that someone's reaction to the revelation of divorce/transition says something about them, and their acceptance of your past.

BTW, I'm saying this as someone who's divorced. Y'know, just in case it matters to you. In the long term. If we have a 'long term'. Damn, I'm ruining the moment, amn't I.

Really hard not to get a sense of smug superiority since uBlock Origin has kept me from seeing any of this Youtube ad crap for years. And somehow, I don't even feel guilty about it.

While the uninformed masses wallow pitifully in a mire of advertising, I gloriously dance on the surface of their pit of writhing flesh. I, God among insects, transcend their hellish torture of video ads and clickthroughs, reveling in the ability to watch whatever I want as soon as I click the play button! Muahahahaha!

...OK, maybe that strayed slightly beyond "smug superiority" and into "disturbing sociopath" territory. But it still feels good!

I'm baaaaaack ... to wish you a delightful Birthday arvana! Revel in the day

So yeah, im a half in, half out of the closet trans person living a genderfluid reality. Complicated existence, and unlesz you're in the demographic or a serious ally, you just don't understand what it's like. This isn't a new revelation, I have known this about myself as long as i have had self awareness.

I grew up during the Reagan era, so no one gave a shit that I thought I was a girl.

Literally just shit on and reshaped and fear thunderstruck, raped, molested as a form of homosexual comversion -- you got this shit?

I just didn't understand what people meant when they were trying to explain the differencez between male and female because i was CERTAIN i was a girl when I was 3 years old. And yes i have those memories. In fact, the age of 4 through 7 are the most vivid and awful memories of my reality an you may stare theough me and rwfuse to understand if you want, but like the song says "We exist." (By Arcade Fire; Cool song even if the musician isnt trans.)

Anyway. We are just shit on. I'm used to it. A friend of mine used to call me a white nigger and honestly, as racial insensitive as that is (a black guy telling me this) that is the feeling. Police brutality and all. Whatever. You dont want to understand so just dont bother. I got sick to death of explaining this so long ago it doent matter to me. How fu king sad is that? How fu ling sad is my goddamn perspective? How can I even be happy in this world? Its shit.

Logic: If you are so afraid we are a bunch of rapists, what about gay people who aren't transgender -- where do they take a pee where people won't fear them molesting people of the same sex? I mean, is there going to be a "Gays Only" and "Transgender Only" bathroom?? It doesn't make sense even if you fear us.

And in my humble and humiliated existence, gay people have wanted nothing to do with me and have even tried to convert and change my opinions of myself. Even in the middle of FUCKING LA PRIDE. Assholez like that CUNT Milo. He can go DIE.

It doesn't make sense. Have you ever peed in a Men's Restroom with a dress on? Totally awkward.

I know I'm using colloquialisms and non-PC language, but I'm just really depressed about this -- as if I wasn't already depressed about everything all the time lol

Republicans. Fuck you. I have no other means of relating my disappointment in the entirity of all reality -- the very fabric of this universe is hate.

29 comments, most of them rather long and more-or-less well reasoned, yet none about the content.

I get if you don't trust RT. It's a propaganda outlet of a foreign government, after all. But RT is not Chemical Ali style of propaganda: it is solid, well-researched reporting on many topics, subtly slanted on others, and completely balls-to-the-wall denial of reality on others again.

You want to take that as a reason to ignore it entirely? Knock yourself out.

I won't. Which isn't saying much, because I prefer text over video.

Anyway, they regularly offer a valuably "Korrektiv" with regards to reporting in the mainstream media. Of course I would prefer if I could get that from a less-dubious outlet like, maybe, the Indepedant, or the NZZ, but I can't.

Let's talk about the content of this clip, shall we.

Hedges references the Prop-or-Not pieces run by the WaPo. Does anyone here disagree that those were a total and utter smear job? Painting Truthout, Truthdig, Counterpunch, Alternet, BlackAgendaReport, NakedCapitalism and others as stooges of the Kremlin is such an obvious attempt to discredit dissenting voices that it's, quite frankly, rather offensive. Yves Smith and Glen Ford as mouthpieces of the Kremlin... my ass cheeks.

On the other hand, quite a lot of journalists in the US seem to have embraced the Red Scare with open arms, seeing as it gives an excuse as to why their previous HRC lost against the orange-skinned buffoon. Kyle illustrated it nicely with Rachel Maddow.

Second point: they had James Clapper present the report. Seriously? The fucker was caught lying under oath during the initial stages of the NSA revelations. Wasn't the fuckface also in charge of the satellite reconnaisence prior to the Iraq war, who could have presented imagery that debunked the claims of WMD "factories", and decided not to? He is just as trustworthy as Chemical Ali, but less entertaining.

Third: half the report was about RT. Why? I thought it was meant to outline how they "hacked" the election? What does their propaganda outlet have to do with that? And the critique they presented... has anyone read the passage about the "alleged Wall Street greed"? They are having a laugh, and people take it seriously.

Fourth: it distracts from the aspects of HRC's loss they don't want to be a subject of public discussion: class issues. They offered nothing for the working class, who got a shoddy deal over the last decades, and tried to focus entirely on identity politics, completely denying even the existence of class issues. Which is also why it's now the "white, male worker" who is to blame. Nevermind that >50% of white, female workers also voted Trump. Nevermind that significant portions of non-white working class folks also voted Trump. Can't be. According to the narrative, these people are minorities first, working-class second, and identity politics always trumps class politics. Except it didn't.

All this rage at the "deplorables", the "less educated"... it just reeks massively of class bigotry. Those plebs decided to vote for someone other than our beloved Queen HRC? How dare they...

And finally, RT's own part of this segment, about the credibility of the intelligence community's claims. Any disagreement on this? Anyone? Anyone think the torturers at the CIA are trustworthy enough to take their word without hard evidence?

Meanwhile this filth and the horrible people who voted for Trump and support the Republican party, AKA radical right Christians HATE homosexuals themselves. They don't show their hate via bombs, but via tossing stones of bigotry and laws to discriminate against them for daring to sin differently.

And there is no opinion on climate change... again it is science. No denying the science. You are entitled to your own opinions, yes, but not your own facts. Sorry, but the universe isn't only 6,000 years old, no matter what your stupid book says.

And you can think gay marriage is a sin. Nobody on the Left ever said you had to accept the sin, to accept the homosexuality, but you do have to accept them as people. It is the right who wants to deny them rights as human beings, just because they sin differently than the rest of us. Jesus said let those without sin toss the first stone, and then notably didn't toss any stones himself, who hung out with the sinners and taught love was the most important thing, but the Right is far comfortable tossing those stones against the gays, to deny them a wedding cake, to deny them a wedding and other rights, just for a sin that doesn't effect anyone but those doing it. It isn't murder, but the Right treats it as such. That isn't just stating an opinion, that is full action against another human being for being different than you, and this ass hole and anyone who agrees with him is a horrible human being for wanting to deny somebody rights for being different. Yes, we may disagree that it being a big deal, but there isn't an effort to deny you the right to speak out against homosexuality if you are so inclined, but you can't claim you are being repressed when you are the one seeking to do the repression. Apparently the Right's attitude is "my sin, isn't as gross as yours, so it's not as bad... and God isn't doing a good job of convicting you of it, so I'll do that job for Him" as He's too weak or something to do it Himself apparently.

Sodom's sin was being a land of plenty and not doing enough to help the needy and the poor in her borders, and other versus talk about how rude it was to foreigners... sounds a lot like the Republican party in the US... actually, the Republican party and Trump sound a lot like the anti-Christ system in Revelations... but I'll ignore that and assume that Christianity is still more than likely just as fake as the other 5,000 gods. Now, yes, the Bible does mention the sexual immorality of Sodom, so it likely didn't help, but it's specific sin, the thing God judged it for, was not doing enough to help the needy and the poor, though it had plenty of resources to do so. Basically the "I don't want my tax dollars going to help those [needy and poor] people" as my evangelical brother in law once said. That sums up the Right these days, fuck the poor, and help the rich, who cares what Jesus said about the rich and the poor.

Then the whole, you can't judge a whole party based on a few bad apples... yet the Right sits in judgement of all Muslims and want to deny people refuge who are trying to escape the radicals, because one or two radicals might slip in for each thousand saved... that's showing the love of Christ, "stay there you Muslim bastard, have your women raped, and you children forced into military camps and be radicalized, serves you right for daring to be having an accident of birth being born in the wrong country and being raised on the wrong faith". That is the attitude the Right sends out when they want to deny refuge to refugees.

So I sit in judgement of all Christians based on the fact the KKK, Nazis, Westboro... and frankly what seems to be the vast majority of evangelical Christians these days. If they can sit in judgement of others, I'll sit in judgement of them. I realize the hypocrisy of that, and admit it, which is FAR more than anyone on the Right ever would do. But as the Carman (famed Christian singer whom I've seen many many times live when I was a Christian) song says, their "witness could have been more than it had".

Basically this is 5:32 worth of hypocrisy that is so typical of the Right that those deep in it can't even begin to see it.

Hey newtboy, you have a misunderstanding there. The original sin was committed in the garden of Eden, when Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Because of that, death entered the world through Adam:

1 Corinthians 15:21-22: For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

Jesus didn't have a sin nature because God was His Father. That was, I think, one of the reasons why the virgin birth was necessary. Jesus is the new Adam.

In regards to Jesus bearing our punishment, Jesus fully bore Gods wrath for all sin. The way I understand it is this: Jesus, being God, is an infinite being. Because He is an infinite being, He could bear an infinite punishment in a finite amount of time. It seems counter intuitive to us finite creatures, but there is a good illustration of the concept by a mathematician named David Hilbert:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert's_paradox_of_the_Grand_Hotel

The idea is that you have a hotel with an infinite amount of rooms which is totally occupied. A guest comes by who wishes to be accommodated so the owner has the guest in room 1 move to room 2, and the guest in room 2 move to room 3, etc, which makes room for the guest. You can do this an infinite amount of times.

As far as partying in hell, that is not what the bible says will happen. The bible describes hell as eternal conscious torment. In juxtaposition to that, this is what the bible says Heaven is like:

Revelation 21:3-5

And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying:

“Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man,
and He will live with them.

They will be His people,
and God Himself will be with them as their God.

He will wipe away every tear from their eyes,
and there will be no more death
or mourning or crying or pain,
for the former things have passed away.”

And the One seated on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.” Then He said, “Write this down, for these words are faithful and true.”

Ephesians 4:26 Be angry, and do not sin: do not let the sun go down on your wrath

There is room for righteous anger; it is right to get angry at injustice and sin. What we are not permitted to do is react inappropriately or harbor anger towards others. Jesus was righteously angry at His Fathers house being profaned, and he drove out those who were profaning it. That is why He said this after he drove them out:

Matthew 21:12 And He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a ‘den of thieves

There was no sin there. Neither was Jesus in sin when He asked the Father to take away the cross. He was still submitted to the will of God, willing to do whatever He commanded:

Luke 22:41-42 And He was withdrawn from them about a stone’s throw, and He knelt down and prayed, saying, “Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done

God will tell us to do things that we don't want to do, or don't think we can do. We can't pretend we want to do something we don't want to do; the sin would be in refusing to do it

That is where you are at; you don't love God, and you don't want to do Gods will, and you are acutely aware that things would need to change in your life if you followed the Lord. You would rather spend a limited amount of time doing your will than an eternity with God. You don't have to pretend you feel any differently than you do, God knows.

The thing is, even though you feel that way God still loves you. He is reaching out to you in love and is calling you to commit your life to Him. I used to feel the same way you do, that is until He revealed His love to me. I wasn't even looking for it, and certainly had done nothing to deserve it. He didn't love me any more than He loves you, because while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. If you knew His love, instead of saying what you've said, you would wish more than anything that you had met God earlier in life. I know how you feel, believe me, but there is a lot to know about God that cannot be described in words, and has to be known through His personal revelation to you alone.

I dunno if it is right to blame liberals when a campaign uses fear and hate to the degree Trump did. The Dems failed to address it, but it was not they alone that set the fires, and it certainly wasn't the left fanning them. How do you address bigotry? Must we forever defend the foundations of equality from this...rot?

Trump demonstrated a complete disdain for the truth. The media failed to call him on it - fucking fallacy of the middle-ground bullshit. But then idk if that would have made a difference. Sad that really.

Two party system doesn't help. I think this increasing polarisation is partly due to that, partly due, ironically, to the internet. It was meant to connect us to everybody! In reality it only really connects us to the people we agree with. I also think it is interesting how different cities and the country votes. Its the same deal here in the UK. London is like a different country, culturally and politically, to the rest of England. I imagine the big cities in America have a similar disconnect from the country around them.

I hope this will be a lesson. But I already begin to doubt it. Clinton blaming her loss on the email revelations. Lady, maybe don't have so many skeletons hiding away eh? I know you didn't do anything illegal, but nor did your Husband and he still lost the White House because of it.

/rant

I think I'd like to change my vote to "no one - the election was fair". Toute nation a le gouvernement qu'elle merite.

It took me months to get over the first revelation of this whole "Mandela" thing. I'm just more unnerved that so many others have the same memory.

... and one more for good measure: The Fury and Failure of Donald Trump by Matt Taibbi

Hell of a zinger right at the start:
"Keeping up with Trump revelations is exhausting. By late October, he'll be caught whacking it outside a nunnery. There are not many places left for this thing to go that don't involve kids or cannibalism. We wait, miserably, for the dong shot."

And it only gets better:
"Trump's early rampage through the Republican field made literary sense. It was classic farce. He was the lewd, unwelcome guest who horrified priggish, decent society, a theme that has mesmerized audiences for centuries, from Vanity Fair to The Government Inspector to (closer to home) Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. When you let a hands-y, drunken slob loose at an aristocrats' ball, the satirical power of the story comes from the aristocrats deserving what comes next. And nothing has ever deserved a comeuppance quite like the American presidential electoral process, which had become as exclusive and cut off from the people as a tsarist shooting party."