Any one notice the "Investigativestigation" on the police crime scene tape? Is that another Biden gaffe?

loading...

In the article there is no literal mention that the border restrictions are "indefinite". That's a very loose interpretation of the CDC directive. The actual mechanism is mentioned directly in the article itself: "While C.D.C officials will review the dangers posed by the virus to the American public every 30 days, the new order essentially means that the border will be closed to immigrants until Mr. Redfield explicitly says otherwise". I'm not sure why this is controversial. If an explicit order was given in the first place, wouldn't you expect ANOTHER explicit order to nullify the former?

But beyond that, when you have 36 million Americans out of work, shouldn't you give these people the priority to get back to work first when the economy kicks in high gear because, you know, they're Americans?

loading...

Apparently the mask is on the floor at the UN.

What disgusting virtue-signalling by the UN. You can tell this was a collab campaign between UN Women and the Secretary-General to politicize gender DURING COVID-19!!! Probably required a brainstorm session to come up with all the talking points to frame the narrative. Unbelievable, insufferable bullshit.

Here's the gist of the article: "Sure the DATA shows that men are the greatest casualty, but here are some bullshit talking points why women are the TRUE victims."

loading...

slow clap

loading...

Tim is very smart and comes off as well-read in his IRL streams. Definitely knows way more than his casual guests on almost every single topic. But I need to call him out there:

So on the one hand, Tim likes the proposed additional oversight on business LOANS (read: federal bureaucracy), but is scared and terrified that local and state governments are cracking down on people breaking curfews and lockdowns, while also lamenting the expansion of state and federal governments through the Defense Production Act?

Tim, these are two sides of the same coin. Don't think for a second that the Dems' inclusion of the Business Oversight Inspector General will be a laissez-faire position. This, too, will be authoritarian if the Dems get their way with their inclusion riders.

loading...

These Democrats are Evil. Period.

What's with this absurd D.I.E. bullshit in the Phase 3 Bill? How the hell do they have the balls to throw this shit in there when it has NOTHING to do with rescuing the average American citizen, and their employers? This isn't an Omnibus bill!!!

I hope to God they get absolutely shafted and humiliated in November. I hope they get screwed just like Labour did in Britain.

loading...

That Salon "article" was batshit crazy. I can only imagine the author being one of the following:

  1. A true cultist sycophant.
  2. A dyed-in-the-wool grifter
loading...

TL;DR version: I appreciate Carl not being assertive in things he doesn't know about. He's definitely willing to learn things. 1) Context is King. The verse is authentic, but you can't just read it in isolation and in English; you cannot derive laws and morals from it this way. 2) Gender Equality is only in the Eyes of God Almighty insofar as how we are judged on the Day of Judgement. As for this life, let's just say no society in history, has ever been able to claim "Equality" in the literal manner.

LONG FORM:

I appreciate that Carl is hesitant to be so certain about a subject that he doesn't have expertise in. And while he does bring out goods points and "food for thought", I as a devout Muslim need to bring some things to the fore:

  1. CONTEXT IS KING. Just as we condemn corporate shills and the establishment for misquoting or framing the narrative (e.g. Russian Collusion, Democrat virus hoax, etc...), pulling out verses from the Quran (2:228) - while in and of themselves are in fact authentic - means very little if you are attempting to use them as fodder for arguments. There are some very basic baseline requirements for not only interpreting but extracting rulings and laws from the Quran, and they include: A) Only the Arabic version can be used, because the Quran was revealed to the Prophet (PBUH) in Arabic, and it is in fact passed down verbatim, to THIS DAY, from the Prophet (PBUH). Any translation of the Quran is officially called "The translation of the interpretation of the meanings of the Quran". The reason for this is quite obvious, namely that actual meaning is lost when words are translated from one language to another. B) The time and purpose of when this verse was revealed, coupled with the verses BEFORE AND AFTER, are essential for interpretation. No verse has ever interpreted in isolation, EVER.

  2. Gender Equality is, and at the same time is NOT an aspect of Islam. What do I mean by that? In the Eyes of God Almighty, we are all equal and on the day of Judgement no gender will be judged harsher or lesser based on their chromosomes (and this is shared with the common Christian ethos of "we are all created equal"). However, insofar as this worldly life is concerned, clearly we are not "equal", otherwise we would be all the same gender, race, ability, height and skill. That's a preposterous claim. And no civil and non-theistic society can claim this "equality" in any manner. And there is a specific verse in the Quran (I can't pull it out) where God Almighty warns, Men and Women, NOT to wish what God has bestowed upon the other gender, as it will lead to assured failure. This point is not up for debate or interpretation. It's been settled since the time of the Prophet (PBUH). And yes, a capable man with his faculties intact is the authority in his household over his wife and kids, but it also comes with the ultimate responsibility of feeding, clothing and educating those same people as well. And when I say "responsibility", I mean they will be held to account on the Day of Judgement for their failures in this regard.

loading...

Where's the Captain Picard facepalm ASCII when you need it?

loading...

A few Captain Obvious comments: 1) Rashida Tlaib is a white Palestinian (like myself). She and I are semites. We are in no way brown. She's whiter than Chuck Shumer and Nancy Pelosi. 2) Linda Sarsour is not only a white Palestinian, she also happens to be a hijabi (i.e. adherent to Islam) that is pro-abortion). One of Islam's primary tenets is the sanctity of live. Cognitive Dissonance Level 9000. 3) BLM is so 2015.


Edit History

2020-54-Th 03:54:17 pm

A few Captain Obvious comments: 1) Rashida Tlaib is a white Palestinian (like myself). She and I are semites. We are in no way brown. She's whiter than Chuck Shumer and Nancy Pelosi. 2) Linda Sarsour is not only a white Palestinian, she also happens to be a hijabi (i.e. adherent to Islam) that is pro-abortion>>

loading...
Dissenter
connecting...