Mark Spencer

person

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

The reason they can claim they are a religion of peace is because they define "peace" as "living in subjugation to Allah". In other words, murdering, raping, and torturing "infidels" is, by their definition, a peaceful act. Imposing Sharia law (and heavy taxes) on unbelievers? Also peaceful. According to them, anyways. Oh, and living in a country that isn't ruled by Islam? That's "not peaceful" no matter how free you are to worship however you please. Islam teaches that Jihad is necessary to make the world "peaceful."

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

@CynicalPublius @BuzzPatterson any landing you can walk away from is a good landing. Given the obvious gusty cross-winds that pilot was dealing with, I'd call it an excellent landing.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

So your arbitrary date of 1953 is somehow more important than his arbitrary date of 1979? What about 1941, when the Allies invaded and overthrew the government to secure the oil and a corridor for the Soviets to get lend-lease supplies? Or 1921 when the British helped install the very man they deposed 20 years later.

@SeniorChief5858 chose the 1979 date for a specific reason - because from 1953 to 1979, Iran's government was a classically progressive, western-oriented nation, and then in 1979, that government was overthrown by a tyrannical religious regime that is in every way antithetical to everything the West stands for.

It's not ignorance of backstory any more than your selection of 1953 is. Foreign nations have meddled in the affairs of other nations since time immemorial. US and western meddling didn't begin in 1953, nor was what happened then an anomalous event. Both pro-western and anti-western sentiment existed in the region before, during, and after any arbitrary date we can choose going back well into the 1600s.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

These verses of scripture came into my mind this morning as I pondered the state of the world. I think it's significant that in both these cases, the people being addressed are not those who haven't learned the Word of God, but those who purport to understand and teach it, but who have strayed from the path of righteousness. How easy is it for us to let the "commandments of men," taught by those who seek power over us, to blind us to the truth?

"O ye wicked and perverse generation, why hath Satan got such great hold upon your hearts? Why will ye yield yourselves unto him that he may have power over you, to blind your eyes, that ye will not understand the words which are spoken, according to their truth?" (Book of Mormon, Alma 10:25)

"Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." (KJV Matthew 15:7-9)

Fortunately, just as the Lord has warned us of the poison, he has given us the antidote:

"But ye are commanded in all things to ask of God, who giveth liberally; and that which the Spirit testifies unto you even so I would that ye should do in all holiness of heart, walking uprightly before me, considering the end of your salvation, doing all things with prayer and thanksgiving, that ye may not be seduced by evil spirits, or doctrines of devils, or the commandments of men; for some are of men, and others of devils." (Doctrine and Covenants 46:7)

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

I think the biggest thing that's turned me away from the permissive philosophies of liberalism is seeing the consequences of those philosophies in real life.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

I've had the chance to review the available footage of the incident with Mr. Pretti and look at a few analyses of what happened, and I feel like there's still a lot that I don't know about what happened.

First, let me state very clearly that the fact that Mr. Pretti was armed does not mean he was there for the purpose of causing violence. As far as I can tell, he was carrying legally (and even so, restrictions on carrying are unconstitutional barring some very limited exceptions and I would support his right to carry even if it was considered illegal in that jurisdiction).

As far as I can tell, Mr Pretti was actively resisting efforts by law enforcement officers to first remove and then detain him after he repeatedly entered their operating area. During the struggle, officers became aware of his gun which was allegedly in a back holster. It is unclear as to whether Pretti "brandished" or reached for his gun, but one of the officers drew his gun in response to at least one of the other officers shouting "GUN!"

It appears next that one of the officers removed Pretti's gun from the holster and was moving it away from the scuffle when the gun appears to discharge. In the chaos of the moment, the sound of the gun discharging leads to one or more officers firing their guns at Pretti.

Given the totality of the circumstances, and the speed at which all this happened, it is highly likely that the officers who fired were unaware that Mr. Pretti's gun had been removed, nor could they have known he didn't have other guns in his possession. They responded to a perceived threat with the force they had good reason to believe was justified.

If that is what happened, that would put this shoot in the "lawful but awful" classification. Yes, the officers were probably justified, but that doesn't make it a "good shoot". It was an ugly situation that didn't end well.

In the 50's and 60's, protest organizers encouraged protestors to use "passive resistance" when officers tried to arrest them -- that is, not to actively resist arrest, but to refuse to do anything to assist officers in their attempts to arrest them. It is my opinion that similar behavior should be encouraged for current protestors.

I completely support anyone's right to peacefully, lawfully protest. While I think targeting the law enforcement officers themselves, rather than the courts and administration who direct them is counter-productive, I even support your right to -- again -- peacefully and lawfully protest them.

But when you commit crimes by actively interfering with their operations, expect to get arrested. And if you resist arrest, expect force to be used. And if you create a situation where they have to use force, things will eventually go bad. That's the reality of the situation.

There are a number of things that, had they gone differently, would mean Pretti would be still alive today. As unfortunate as it is that he died, Pretti himself bears a hefty weight of responsibility for what happened to him. His choices to interfere with law enforcement, and to resist arrest are direct contributors to the outcome.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

To understand your potential, you have to know what your potential is. To achieve your potential, you have to work.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

Did you know when an individual takes the oath of citizenship, that by law they "absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen." (https://t.co/W3yHv5MAm3)

They also promise to "support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America" and "bear true faith and allegiance to the same".

Just something worth remembering.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

I really like this guy's breakdown on the laws around immigration and ICE operations. Really thorough and documented

https://t.co/AbJsS1TbbF

[Cynical Publius @CynicalPublius]

The Democrat experiment is based almost exclusively on the concept that there is no such thing as wholly objective truth. Instead, "truth" is transient, is based on emotion, and each person can have their own "truth."

This is entirely consistent with Marxist principles of the dialectic and modern critical theory as first presented by the Frankfurt School (particularly critical legal theory).

Because God speaks in absolute truths, God is the greatest enemy to the Democrat experiment. Thus, the destruction of God becomes the overriding imperative of Democrats.

With that in mind, no truth is more fundamental than the fact that God created us as man and woman. It is the very most core fundamental, objective truth that we all must experience—which is why the “transgender” movement is so essential to the Democrat experiment. If the way God created us is transient and subject to the whim of the moment, then ALL THINGS are transient and can be adapted for one’s personal or political benefit.

At its core, “transgenderism” is the denial of God’s truth.

So when you see erstwhile “conservatives” like the blithering yahoo below embracing this anti-God position, realize that they never once held core beliefs and instead their former “conservative” views were mere posturing to further their innate grifterism. People like him believe only in their own benefit, making them nothing more than empty vessels of nihilism.

[MAHA Action @MAHA_Action]

Dr. Marty Makary says the creators of the old food pyramid hid the truth about saturated fats.

“The propagators of this dogma tried to prove their theory correct.”

“In the 1960s, the colleagues of Ansel Keys tried to do the end-all study to prove saturated fat caused our health problems.”

“The low-fat group had higher rates of coronary heart disease and heart attacks.”

“The opposite of what they expected.”

“They suppressed the data for 16 years.”

“When you avoid fat, you end up with ultra-processed carbohydrates and sugar.”

“We created a generation of children with low protein, high carbohydrates, sugar addiction, burdened with ultra-processed foods.”

“Those days are over. Are telling people the truth about food.”

[Nina Teicholz, PhD @bigfatsurprise]

One of the key parts of the new US Dietary guidelines: a warning the public about the very real nutrient deficiencies that come with vegetarian and especially vegan diets.
People on these diets don't realize (bc authorities have never told them) that they are risking their health eating this way.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

Two and a half years ago, I was diagnosed with type-2 diabetes. At the time, I thought I was eating healthy. I was eating the way I'd been taught to eat -- the way the government guidelines told us was best.

After doing extensive research, I rejected the guidelines given me by doctors and nutritionists and began a "radical" diet that rejected much of the "conventional" knowledge.

Combined with an increased exercise regimen, it took less than six months to completely cure my diabetes. No medication, healthy blood glucose and A1C levels.

The diet I adopted? It looks exactly like the recommended diet the HHS just released.

[HHS @HHSGov]

Introducing: The New Pyramid

[HHS @HHSGov]

Introducing: The New Pyramid

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

On this Thanksgiving day, I'd like to express my gratitude most especially for my wonderful family and for the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

[Dallin H. Oaks @OaksDallinH]

Great blessings come to families if they pray together, kneeling night and morning to offer thanks for blessings and to pray over common concerns.  #GeneralConference

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

Dallin H Oaks is a living prophet of God.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

"Mormons" - members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints - believe that Jesus Christ is God, the Son of God, the Creator and Redeemer of the World.

Ask any of us, and we will claim we're Christians.

The argument that we're not stems from the fact that while "We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in The Holy Ghost" (Articles of Faith 1, Joseph Smith), many Trinitarian Christians consider our belief that they are three individuals but One God to be heresy.

Many people also incorrectly believe we don't believe in the Bible. We very much believe that the Holy Bible, translated correctly, is the Word of God (see Articles of Faith 8).

We also believe that God has revealed his word to other people, including modern-day living prophets. Again, this is seen by some other Christians as heresy, and is used as a second argument to reject the Christianity of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Whether or not we accept one another as fellow Christians, God's enemies see no distinction.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

@2aHistory Also, the first multi-shot handgun was invented in 1597, two centuries before the 2nd amendment was written.

[Mark Spencer @stunkboy]

@Mrgunsngear For my eyes, for whatever reason, the green appears as a solid dot, an the red dot appears as a vertical line. Don't know why that is, but it's a big enough difference to matter.