Trump putting Christ back in Christmas - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Videos about news and current events.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#14875572
colliric wrote:But that's only if one slavishly interprets the verse with the Animals outside and does not consider that Israel is a warmer country. It is mainly predicated on that verse. You can elaborate if you wish to, I will read it.

Herod dying in 4BC has been strongly disputed recently. The Wikipedia page reflects this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_the_Great

It lists 4BCE(4BC) and 1CE(1AD) as two possible death dates, with alot of scholars now supporting the traditional date again instead of the 4BCE date. So that is in fact not known. We thought it was for a while clear, but newer archeological developments, such as the discovery of his possible tomb threw it back into doubt.

Even this Wikipedia says King Herod was seriously ill in 5 BC uses 4 BC as King Herod's death with his last actions of changing his will also in 4 BC, but not completing it so that the title of kingship was not given to either of his sons. So the totality of the evidence still points to 4 BC as the year of his death.

How cold it was in Israel in December is not the main issue. But that during the lambing season in the Spring is when the shepherds would be out watching over their flock by night to preserve the newborn. Remember also that John the Baptist referred to Jesus as the lamb of God. But also Luke, who stated that he had checked everything out thoroughly, stated the following:

Now His parents went to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover. And when He became twelve, they went up there according to the custom of the Feast;
(Luke 2:41-42 NASB)

Notice that I highlighted the word "became" because that is important. I checked "The Interlinear Bible" and "The Analytical Greek Lexicon" and determined that "became" is the correct translation of the Greek word in that sentence. I also discovered that Greek word was from the root word that means "to come into existence, to be born. Jesus "became" 12 years of age on his birthday just like everyone else. And according to that scripture it was at the time they went to Jerusalem for the Passover feast, which is always in the Spring.

It seems fitting to me that just as Jesus was sacrificed as our Passover lamb that He was also born to be our Passover lamb or Savior as Luke puts it.

In the same region there were some shepherds staying out in the fields and keeping watch over their flock by night. And an angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them; and they were terribly frightened. But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people; for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.
(Luke 2:8-11 NASB)

Isaiah prophesied of Christ long before His birth, saying that the Messiah would be “brought as a lamb to the slaughter” (Isaiah 53:7).

See the following article
https://opentheword.org/2015/04/04/jesu ... over-lamb/

Why did an angel announce the birth of Christ to a group of shepherds and no one else?

Traditionally, shepherds were in the fields in large numbers during lambing. They were there to protect the ewes during this vulnerable time and to ensure a safe delivery.

Their appearance suggests Jesus was born during spring lambing.


Godstud wrote:Why does an all-forgiving and merciful god care about sin? If he's all-forgiving, sin is irrelevant. He created a flawed and imperfect being and then is mad at them for their flaws. DUMB!

Religion fail!

God did not create anything flawed. Both the angel Lucifer and Adam became flawed after their creation.
#14875591
Hindsite wrote:Both the angel Lucifer and Adam became flawed after their creation.
That's just an excuse for shoddy craftsmanship! :lol:
#14875616
B0ycey wrote:Money is an IOU from the BoE and is no more the Queens than the Moon. If an image was a claim for property, then Hamill, Ford and Fisher have much to claim from Lucas.


https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/adask.w ... rency/amp/

Nonetheless she technically legally owns "my" money just as the Federal Reserve (and ultimately The President) legally owns yours.

Obviously this stems from Roman law concerning their currency that Jesus was obviously familiar with, after all it's common sense. The person who put their picture on it obviously legally produced and legally owns the money and is technically lending it to you. Even though in practice you own it.
#14875617
@Hindsite Here is a preview of how Trump is full of hate, it is NOT just my opinion:

DONALD TRUMP IS BASICALLY A HATE GROUP ALL BY HIMSELF UNDER FBI DEFINITION

Donald Trump is a one-man hate group.

If the president were an organization instead of an individual, it would not be a big stretch to define him as a "hate group" under the FBI's simple definition: “an organization whose primary purpose is to promote animosity, hostility, and malice against persons of or with a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity which differs from that of the members or the organization.”

Now, of course, Donald John Trump's "primary purpose" isn't to advocate for hate and violence. But after that qualifying phrase, Trump pretty much checks off every box in the FBI’s definition.

“When you look at the list of extremist material that he’s put out there, it’s extraordinary,” said Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups.

Let's break it down, element by element.

'Animosity, hostility, and malice against persons'

Based on race

Trump continually wages public feuds with people of color. Last week Trump focused his ire on LaVar Ball, father of one of the UCLA students taken into Chinese custody after they were caught shoplifting in a mall. All three students thanked Trump and the American government for freeing securing their release but when Ball refused to thank the president, Trump called him an “ungrateful fool.”

He criticized ESPN anchor Jemele Hill for calling him a white supremacist, prompting White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders to call for ESPN to fire her.

This hostility isn’t limited to athletics. And it isn't a recent phenomenon.

In 1989, after a jogger was raped in Central Park and her alleged assailants caught, Trump took out a full page ad in New York newspapers calling for the execution of the so-called “Central Park Five”—all of whom were black and Latino and turned out to be innocent of the crime. Trump's ads were widely seen as reckless and partly responsible for the men's wrongful convictions, which were all overturned.

Then there was Charlottesville. He waited two days to comment on the Unite the Right rally where white supremacists marched through the town with torches and chanted Nazi slogans. The demonstration culminated with the death of counterprotester Heather Heyer, who was run over by a car driven by a white supremacist, cops said.

“You also had some very fine people on both sides,” Trump said when asked about the violence. He also said there was violence "on both sides."

Comments like that show Trump is teetering on the precipice of white supremacy, Beirich said, though he doesn't fully fit the label because he has never explicitly expressed hatred for certain minority groups. Without crossing that line, according to Beirich, he cannot be categorized a white supremacist, though almost.

“Does Trump peddle racist propaganda? No doubt. Has he played footsie with extremists? Absolutely,” Beirich said.

Based on religion

Trump's most recent public display of religious intolerance came Tuesday morning when he retweeted three anti-Muslim videos originally posted by British white supremacist Jayda Fransen. Fransen is the deputy leader of the far-right fringe party Britain First.

Based on disability

Trump may not routinely target disabled people but he famously mocked disabled New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski during a campaign speech, even pantomiming the body movements of Kovaleski as a result of the congenital joint condition arthrogryposis.

"Now, the poor guy—you've got to see this guy!" Trump said of Kovaleski, who was part of a Times team that debunked Trump's claim that he saw American Muslims cheering the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Based on sexual orientation, gender or gender identity

Trump’s position on the gay community has been mixed. He’s defended gays in the military in the past, but in October, he became the first sitting president to speak at the Family Research Council, an organization the Southern Poverty Law Center designated an anti-LGBTQ hate group.

In July—on the 79th anniversary of President Truman’s signing of Executive Order 9981 that established equality of treatment and opportunity in the Armed Services—Trump signed an executive order prohibiting transgender people from serving in the military. The federal district court later struck it down, finding the order unconstitutional.

Two months later, Trump's Department of Justice argued in court that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not protect Americans from being fired based on their sexual orientation. The Justice Department awkwardly pitted itself against another federal agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which had already sided with the plaintiff who claimed he was fired from his job for being gay.

"(It's) as conservative as it could possibly get: if having sex with a man is okay for a woman, it has to be okay for a man as well," Greg Nevins of Lambda Legal, told Newsweek at the time. "You cannot apply a different rule based on gender, according to the law. Apparently, that wasn’t conservative enough for the DOJ."

This is by no means a complete compendium of Trump's promotion of hate; it is merely an abridged list.

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-ra ... oup-727773


And

TRUMP AND THE RISKS OF DIGITAL HATE

IN THE YEAR 1929, the Nazi propaganda tabloid Der Stürmer published a caricature of an imaginary group of devious looking Jewish people peeling off in a car after apparently running over a German boy, left bleeding in the arms of his father.

In the year 2017, the president of the United States retweeted a video of a dark-haired teenager assaulting a blond, Dutch teenager on crutches, with the erroneous caption, “Muslim migrant beats up Dutch boy on crutches!”

In the year 1942, the Nazi pamphlet Der Untermensch accused Jews of delighting in destroying churches, with the caption, “For the Jew and inhuman the highest satisfaction comes from the destruction of churches!”

In the year 2017, the president of the United States retweeted a video of a bearded Muslim man smashing a fair-skinned statue of the Virgin Mary with the caption, “Muslim Destroys a Statue of the Virgin Mary!”

For many Americans who woke up to President Trump’s tweets Wednesday morning, these videos seemed unduly hateful, and in the case of the video of the boy on the crutches, even fraudulent. (According to Dutch authorities, the assailant was born and raised in the Netherlands.) But for researchers of propaganda, the historical parallels within the videos were more chilling than anything else. There are, they say, just two differences between the German caricatures and the president’s tweets. First, the social media age has given Trump more readers on Twitter than Der Stürmer or Der Untermensch ever had. And second, we have no way of knowing how this chapter in history will end.

"I think this is real dangerous shit," says David Livingstone Smith, a professor of philosophy at the University of New England, who specializes in the history of dehumanization and who authored a book on the topic called Less Than Human.

"This is scary shit," echoes Jason Stanley, a professor at Yale and author of the book How Propaganda Works, whose father fled Nazi Germany in 1939.

To be clear and compliant with Godwin's law no one is comparing Trump to Adolf Hitler. "That would be absurd," Smith says. His concern is that the president and the general public have not learned history's lessons about the impact this type of fear-mongering can have. That's especially true today in the age of Facebook- and Twitter-driven echo chambers, in which any headline, photo, or video can be slyly captioned or edited to distort its original meaning to comply with a group's existing bias. The long past of propaganda blended with the communication channels of the present and future form a toxic mix.

Trump's tweets may look like an impulsive and offensive attempt to pander to the Ann Coulter wing of the Republican party, but looked at through the long lens of history, Trump's messaging has dangerous undertones that could be compared to propaganda tactics found in the well-worn playbook of how to demonize entire categories of humans. As forbidden as such historical comparisons are in polite society, Smith says, it's in ignoring history altogether that societies risk falling into the time-tested trap of believing that pending mass atrocities clearly announce themselves in bright neon lighting.

"There’s always a backstory," he says.

It typically begins with leaders fomenting fear, specifically by portraying a relatively powerless group as a societal threat. One of the most powerful examples of this was the portrayal of African American slaves in the antebellum south. "African Americans were the most vulnerable members of the population," Smith says, "Yet they were represented as violent monsters, particularly African American men, who were represented as almost super-human in the danger they posed."
https://www.wired.com/story/historians- ... im-tweets/


Last one,


NN)Brendan Cox, the husband of slain British lawmaker Jo Cox, said Wednesday that President Donald Trump has "become a purveyor of hate" after retweeting three anti-Muslim videos from a British far-right account.

"This is like the President retweeting the Ku Klux Klan. This is not a mainstream organization and for the President of the United States, our greatest ally as a country, to be retweeting, to be providing a microphone to those voices," Cox told CNN's Anderson Cooper on "AC360."
"I think no matter what your perception of the UK, I think has been shocked by that."
The videos, posted by Jayda Fransen, the deputy leader of Britain First, a far-right and ultranationalist political group, depict purported Muslims assaulting people and, in one video, smashing a statue of the Virgin Mary.

"These narratives have impact," Cox said. Cox's wife, a member of Parliament, was killed in June 2016 by a 53-year-old man with extreme right wing views as he shouted "Britain first."
"When you retweet and endorse an organization like this, what that does is it changes people's views of what is acceptable," Cox said. "It means that people are more open about their hatred. It means they're more likely to act on their hatred."http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/29/politics/brendan-cox-donald-trump-retweet-jayda-fransen-anderson-cooper-cnntv/index.html
#14875619
You need to actually read your links @colliric if you're going to post one. And read it properly. It just confirms what I told you and most of it was even explained to be speclative. Anyways, money is an IOU. The debt is the government's, so yes they own it (because it is backed by their assets). But you get to spend it because it is an IOU. You are passing on their debt to someone else. And the Queen is not the BoE. So it is a national debt and not a personal one.
#14875625
But it's also my point. Given they technically own it, they have the right to ask for some of it back from you, in the form of taxation.

That was Jesus point.

And the Queen is technically the head of the Government in Australia and the UK as she is our head of state.

It is legally technically personal debt to "The Crown"(or Caesar in Jesus time) though practically it is instead national debt to the Federal Government(or the government of Rome in Jesus day) as the representatives of The Crown(Caesar).
#14875629
MistyTiger wrote:@Hindsite Here is a preview of how Trump is full of hate, it is NOT just my opinion:

The way I see it is many on the left hate Trump because he won against all odds. The left wing media say things like he looks like a thug and a goon and a bully. This just shows jealousy and hatred on their part.


They are the ones that are angry and hating on Trump as he is giving out love. Continue your hate if you wish, but you don't fool me.
#14875630
colliric wrote:But it's also my point. Given they technically own it, they have the right to ask for some of it back from you, in the form of taxation.

That was Jesus point.

And the Queen is technically the head of the Government in Australia and the UK as she is our head of state.

It is legally technically personal debt to "The Crown"(or Caesar in Jesus time) though technically and practically it is national debt to the Federal Government as the representatives of The Crown(or the government of Rome in Jesus day).


They own a debt. A debt. They same way when you borrow from a bank you own that debt. But all debt needs replaying. So it is an asset for the bank. So a bank will 'say' own your home until you pay them back. So for the BoW to get what they own back, they have to return something in return back to you too. So money, though technically not owned by the person who possesses it, is also an asset to them while they hold it. An asset that they can exchange for goods to someone else. And that is basic economics. Not spin candy for you to somehow make the monachy worthy for some unknown reason.

Taxation is a completely different argument all together. You pay the government for the national services they provide. The Queens face on the notes have no relevance to whether you pay tax or not. Does the heirs of Churchill part own all the £5 notes in circulation? No. Because the IOU is the BoEs and not theirs and the Queens.

As for the Queen being the head of state for Australia, again so what? The Queen does not own Aussie money because of it. Does Trump or the Fed own US Dollars? The same principle applys here. So Australia owns Aussie dollars. The Queen is just a figure head for you. She is no more valuable for Australia as she is for the UK. And that is, not valuable at all.
#14875667
Hindsite wrote:The way I see it is many on the left hate Trump because he won against all odds. The left wing media say things like he looks like a thug and a goon and a bully. This just shows jealousy and hatred on their part.


They are the ones that are angry and hating on Trump as he is giving out love. Continue your hate if you wish, but you don't fool me.


He is a bully. His rhetoric is intentionally sharp and mocking and insulting towards everyone. Every tweet he makes is intentional and is meant to cut or serve some other agenda. He even makes Tillerson look like a liar when Tillerson is his man and should be allowed to do his job, not face such resistance from his employer.

There are those in business and on the right wing side who are distancing themselves from him too.

Here are 13 business leaders who have publicly distanced themselves from the president, so far:

1. Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase & Co. CEO
Business Insider reported that the CEO criticized the president's reaction to the violence in Charlottesville in a statement: "There is no room for equivocation here: the evil on display by these perpetrators of hate should be condemned and has no place in a country that draws its strength from our diversity and humanity."

2. Denise Morrison, CEO of Campbell Soup Company
Morrison left the council Wednesday, according to Business Insider's Bob Bryan and Lydia Ramsey. The move came after Campbell Soup Company released a statement condemning the "racism and murder" that occurred in Charlottesville.

3. Inge Thulin, CEO of 3M

4. Richard Trumka, the president of the AFL-CIO
5. Scott Paul, President of the Alliance for American Manufacturing
6.Kevin Plank, CEO of Under Armour
7. Brian Krzanich, CEO of Intel
8. Kenneth Frazier, Merck CEO
9. Peter Thiel, cofounder of PayPal
10.Bob Iger, CEO of Disney
11. Elon Musk, CEO and founder of Tesla and SpaceX
12. Travis Kalanick, former CEO and founder of Uber
13. Sheryl Sandberg, COO of Facebook
http://www.businessinsider.com/business ... d-co-ceo-1


Right wingers who oppose Trump:

REPUBLICANS ARE SPEAKING OUT AGAINST TRUMP’S 'DEBASEMENT OF AMERICA'

BY GRAHAM LANKTREE ON 10/25/17 AT 6:45 AM
His voice quavering, Arizona Senator Jeff Flake accused President Donald Trump of creating an “alarming and dangerous state of affairs” in American democracy as he announced from the floor of the Senate that he would not run again in 2018.

In the pointed criticism of Trump that followed, Flake joined three other Republican Senators who have turned against the president and who threaten the party’s unity and hold on both houses of Congress in the 2018 midterm elections.

“Without fear of the consequences and without consideration of the rules of what is politically safe or palatable, we must stop pretending that the degradation of our politics and the conduct of some in our executive branch are normal,” Flake told his fellow Republican Senators, urging them to speak out against Trump’s behavior.
http://www.newsweek.com/republicans-are ... ica-692361


Wow, wikipedia has a long, long list of those Republicans who opposed Trump's bid for election in 2016.

List of Republicans who opposed the Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016

This is a list of notable Republicans and conservatives who announced their opposition to the election of Donald Trump, the 2016 Republican Party nominee and eventual winner of the election, as the President of the United States. It also includes former Republicans who opposed Trump's campaign and who left the Republican Party during the 2016 presidential election, as well as Republicans who endorsed a different candidate. It does not include Republicans who opposed Trump during the primaries but never announced opposition to Trump as the nominee. Some of the Republicans support Trump after he won the presidential election, while others continue to oppose Trump.

Former Presidents
George H. W. Bush, President of the United States (1989–93); Vice President of the United States (1981–89) (voted for Hillary Clinton)[1][2][3]
George W. Bush, President of the United States (2001–09); Governor of Texas (1995-2000)[4]

Former 2016 Republican presidential primary candidates[edit]
All candidates signed a pledge to eventually support the party nominee. The following refused to honor it after Trump became the Republican presidential nominee.

Jeb Bush, Governor of Florida (1999–2007)[5]
Carly Fiorina, [a][b] CEO of Hewlett-Packard (1999–2005); 2010 nominee for U.S. Senator from California[6] (originally endorsed Trump for the general election but called for Mike Pence to take his place as nominee after the Access Hollywood Tape surfaced)[7][8]
Lindsey Graham, United States Senator from South Carolina (2003–present) (voted for Evan McMullin)[9]
John Kasich, Governor of Ohio (2011–present); U.S. Representative from Ohio (1983–2001)[10] (wrote in John McCain)[11]
George Pataki, Governor of New York (1995–2006)[12]
Former federal cabinet-level officials[edit]

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
William Bennett,[a] Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (1989–90); United States Secretary of Education (1985–88)[13]
Bill Brock, United States Secretary of Labor (1985-87); United States Trade Representative (1981-85); U.S. Senator from Tennessee (1971-77); Chairman of the Republican National Committee (1977-81)[14]
Michael Chertoff, United States Secretary of Homeland Security (2005–09); Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (2003–05) (endorsed Hillary Clinton)[15][16]
Bill Cohen, United States Secretary of Defense (1997–2001); United States Senator from Maine (1979–97) (endorsed Hillary Clinton)[17][18]
Robert Gates, United States Secretary of Defense (2006–11); Director of Central Intelligence (1991–93)[19]
Carlos Gutierrez, United States Secretary of Commerce (2005–09) (endorsed Hillary Clinton)[20]
Carla Anderson Hills, United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (1975–77), United States Trade Representative (1989–93) (endorsed Hillary Clinton)[15][20]
Ray LaHood, United States Secretary of Transportation (2009–13), U.S. Representative from Illinois (1995–2009)[21]
Greg Mankiw, Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers (2003–05)[22]
Mel Martinez, United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (2001–03); United States Senator from Florida (2005–09); General Chair of the Republican National Committee (2007)[23][24]
Michael Mukasey, United States Attorney General (2007–09)[25]
John Negroponte, United States Ambassador to the United Nations (2001–04); Director of National Intelligence (2005–07); United States Deputy Secretary of State (2007–09) (endorsed Hillary Clinton)[15][20]
Henry Paulson, United States Secretary of the Treasury (2006–09) (endorsed Hillary Clinton)[26]
Colin Powell, United States Secretary of State (2001–05), National Security Advisor (1987–89) (voted for Hillary Clinton)[27]
William K. Reilly, Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (1989–92) (endorsed Hillary Clinton)[20]
Condoleezza Rice,[b] United States Secretary of State (2005–09), National Security Advisor (2001–05)[28]

for more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_R ... aign,_2016


And here's another list: http://www.newsweek.com/roll-call-repub ... ist-651310

It says a lot when one man can sorely divide his own party and lead others to join the other side. There is so much in-fighting, it's just unbelievable until you actually see or hear the comments from his opposition in the GOP. I would not be surprised if Marco Rubio switched to Democrat and others left to join the Green party or Democratic party.
#14875719
MistyTiger wrote:He is a bully. His rhetoric is intentionally sharp and mocking and insulting towards everyone. Every tweet he makes is intentional and is meant to cut or serve some other agenda. He even makes Tillerson look like a liar when Tillerson is his man and should be allowed to do his job, not face such resistance from his employer.

That should be expected of the Trump of God. God is no respecter of persons (Romans 2:11; Acts 10:34).

MistyTiger wrote:There are those in business and on the right wing side who are distancing themselves from him too.

So what? Don't you realize there are many more in business that are happy about his policies, especially his tax plan.

MistyTiger wrote:Right wingers who oppose Trump:
Wow, wikipedia has a long, long list of those Republicans who opposed Trump's bid for election in 2016.

It is obvious that those running against Trump are going to oppose him and the same goes for those that want their candidate to win. The same was true of crooked Hillary Clinton and crazy Bernie Sanders.

Your hate seems to have turned to delusions. Do you want my prayers for you to come to your senses?
#14875913
Hindsite wrote:That should be expected of the Trump of God. God is no respecter of persons (Romans 2:11; Acts 10:34).


So what? Don't you realize there are many more in business that are happy about his policies, especially his tax plan.


It is obvious that those running against Trump are going to oppose him and the same goes for those that want their candidate to win. The same was true of crooked Hillary Clinton and crazy Bernie Sanders.

Your hate seems to have turned to delusions. Do you want my prayers for you to come to your senses?


You seem to be the one with the delusions. I can see how divided the US has become. All the racial tensions have come out and it's very ugly. I can tell if there's racial tension in a room by how people are around me, I can feel their disdain towards me. It's not a nice feeling but I pretend it doesn't bother me.

Perhaps I should pray for you to open your eyes to the truth?
#14875919
Yes, racist assholes are dividing your country. The racial tensions are caused by these evil people, not by the good people of the USA.

If you feel the disdain, then it's because you are a racist. Stop being one and maybe people won't view you with revulsion. Really. God made all humans, didn't he? You're simply hating one of God's creations, if you're a racist.

edit: spelling
Last edited by Godstud on 03 Jan 2018 01:11, edited 1 time in total.
#14875920
I must admit, God choosing Trump as his vessel would be a remarkable change of tactics given his "revelatory history". The first people to know about Christ's birth were a group of lowly shepherds - the type of people who would most likely not be allowed into Trump Tower - and it's not like Jesus was born in a gaudy hotel plastered with fake gold. I'm pretty sure the New Testament narrative is definitively not one that says "bow down and worship your worldly masters and their great wealth".

But whatever makes Hindsite happy, I suppose. :lol:
#14876216
MistyTiger wrote:Perhaps I should pray for you to open your eyes to the truth?

And while you are at it, pray that God will open your own eyes to see the truth. Praise the Lord.
Trump, Oh my god !

Falwell leveraged cable television. Nothing preve[…]

it's China too and it's just a renegade island […]

perfection would be the lack of contradiction Gö[…]

June 19, Wednesday Francis H. Pierpoint is name[…]