Ceremonies marking Jan6

1. President Biden is awarding the Presidential Citizens Medal to 12 people for their service in defending the Capitol and for their service as poll workers. Recipients include Capitol police Goodman, Fanone, Dunn and Edwards, and the two GA poll workers, Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, who were vilified by Trump and falsely accused of election fraud. Officer Sicknick's family will get the Medal in his place.


2. There was a brief ceremony this morning on the steps of the Capitol in remembrance of Jan6. There were short comments by the new Dem Majority leader Jeffries, by Pelosi and the Congressional Chaplain. Jeffries led the Congressman in the Pledge of Allegiance. I do not know if this was set up to be a Dem event, but the TV reporters could not find any Republican leaders in attendance, but there was at least one Republican there.

He's also irresponsibly hidden classified documents from the Obama Presidency.
 
You have had 2 year to prove such nonsense and failed completely.

The failure is all yours.

2020 summer of love is Wa DC.



“some protesters threw projectiles, such as bricks, rocks, caustic liquids, frozen water bottles, glass bottles, lit flares, rental scooters, and fireworks, at law enforcement officials. Overall, 49 USPP officers were injured during the protests from May 29 to May 31, including one who underwent surgery for his injuries. Damage to both Federal and private property also occurred during the protests. With respect to Lafayette Park, historic statues were vandalized with graffiti, and on May 31, the park’s comfort station was set on fire.”

Mark Lee Greenblatt, Inspector General, Review of U.S. Park Police Actions at Lafayette Park (Office of Inspector General, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 2021).
 
Last edited:
What is your objective criteria for insurrectionists? It was not organized, coordinated and unarmed and no plan of action once it obtains its objective.

in·sur·rec·tion
/ˌinsəˈrekSH(ə)n/

noun
a violent uprising against an authority or government

January 6th: "Because its object was to prevent a legitimate president-elect from assuming office, the attack was widely regarded as an insurrection or attempted coup d'etat. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other law-enforcement agencies also considered it an act of domestic domestic terrorism."

_____?
 
in·sur·rec·tion
/ˌinsəˈrekSH(ə)n/

noun
a violent uprising against an authority or government

January 6th: "Because its object was to prevent a legitimate president-elect from assuming office,
It was not legit so that is a lie. The election was a putsch and therefore illegitimate. It remains illegitimate because the Dems cheated and do not believe in democracy. You must be blind to the very post above yours. Where all your bolsheviks pals were tearing up DC in the 2020 summer of love. Molotov cocktails and containers of urine.
the attack was widely regarded as an insurrection or attempted coup d'etat.
The coup happened prior to that when the Dems rigged the election. Biden may be pseudo-legal but in actual is a counterfeit installed via election fraud in direct violation of the democratic process and consistent with fascism where the ends justify the means. This same group did it before in Ukraine in 2014.


pon the overthrowing of Ukrainian government, there was much celebration in U.S media and political circles. Majority of people in U.S hailed these as a putsch while ignoring the fact that the neo-nazi militias instigated the instability.

While politicians in Washington pretended to advocate for democracy, this was all hypocrisy as the motive was different. It should be considered that the government, which U.S was so keen at destabilizing, was a democratically elected one. With disregard to the peace and stability of the nation, U.S politicians were encouraging riots, glorifying violent putsches, as well as destabilizing constitutionally established structures.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other law-enforcement agencies also considered it an act of domestic domestic terrorism."
Nobody charged.
Well i was wondering because it sounds like you are using the term, in the same manner, blacks are called the N word. Don't see much of a distinction with you.
 
Last edited:
It was not legit
It was and is. Joe Biden is the legitimate and lawful winner of the 2020 presidential election. The courts, state governments and constitutional process have all rendered it so.

This is a fact, notwithstanding any petulant foot stamping by the losing team.
 
So if you have never seen a particular god, then it does not exist?
Does that include the god you believe in, as no one has seen it?
You're going to have to go back and try and understand @Temujin's argument in order to understand my post. You've entirely missed the meaning of both.
 
Is that a fact? Well then, I expect to be tripping over spaghetti monsters all day long. Because up to now I've never seen one, because they don't exist. But now that I've been informed that the non-existence of spaghetti monsters is a completely unstable possibility, I can steel myself for my soon to be appearing inevitable encounters.

And I hate to be the one to point out, that you're heretofore confidence in the non-existence of God, is a completely unstable possibility. So do the best you can to not get struck by lightning while putting the finishing touches on your argument for his nonexistence. Because as you have assured us he should be popping into existence at any moment now.

Nothing pops into existence from nothing into nothing. Nobody's observed particles or anti-particles springing into nonexistent space-time. So no you have gotten your facts wrong. Space-time is not nothing. And neither is background radiation. You are desperately grasping for a counter example which does not exist.
Do some research on quantum foam, virtual particles and particle/antiparticle interactions. It's nothing to do with background interaction. And yes particles are popping into existence all the time, and no they don't always annihilate each other.
 
It's good you admit you don't know. It makes your posts more believable. When you figure out when and how an actual particle 'pops' into existence let me know
Greater minds than I have figured out and demonstrated this very thing .
 
By the way, the appearance of quantum mechanics turned out to be of great value theologically. Scientific and theological determinists have argued for similar reasons that there really is no freedom of decision or free will.

Quantum mechanics rushed in to prove that not everything in the universe is determined by the initial big bang and no amount of mathematical insight will ever permit us to correctly predict how history will continue on its course by further perfecting Newtonian physics.

The fact that the randomness introduced by quantum mechanics exists within the universe allows us to understand how God can bring about his purposes without truncating the free will choices of mankind and at the same time not necessarily performing an obvious miracle. This hand of God behind the scenes, this randomness according to quantum mechanics, is what theologians call "special providence." It's an extremely important Christian doctrine and it is one of the things that makes the Christian worldview cogent and satisfying.

I would also say that the symmetry to the scientific insights is extremely satisfying. Because what science calls newtonian physics theologians called "General Providence" and what scientists call quantum mechanics theologians called "Special Providence."
By the way, theology manages to incorporate all and every scientific discovery into itself, as it must do or die, in the process discarding all the theology "truths" it held dear before hand*. Geocentric universe? Flat earth? I'm not in the least surprised to hear of aping scientific terminology and using quantum mechanics to work out how many angels can dance on the
head of a pin.

*Where it cannot do so, for example evolution, it just pretends that it doesn't matter.
 
Do some research on quantum foam, virtual particles and particle/antiparticle interactions.
I have, and I am extremely familiar with the subject for someone who is not a vocational physicist.
It's nothing to do with background interaction.
I didn't say background interaction. Unless my voice to speech program change the word, and I didn't notice. I said background radiation. That is to say the phenomenon you are discussing has never been observed at a temperature of absolute zero. Temperature is not nothing. So if you have background radiation, you don't have anything that is popping out of nothing.
And yes particles are popping into existence all the time,
Again, I said nothing pops out of nothing. And particles popping into existence out of something, is not the same thing as particles popping into existence out of nothing. Please try to respond to the actual arguments I'm making and not inventing a bunch of strawmen. But most crucially this observation has only been made in three large spatial dimensions. It has not and cannot be observed where three large spatial dimensions do not exist. Furthermore it has not been observed in a context where there is not a dimension of time. This phenomena is exclusively limited to observations within a space-time continuum in the presence of background radiation. When you don't have those fundamental requirements you don't have particles popping into existence.
and no they don't always annihilate each other.
I mentioned nothing about that. Again please respond to the arguments I'm making, and not the ones I'm not making.
 
I have, and I am extremely familiar with the subject for someone who is not a vocational physicist.

I didn't say background interaction. Unless my voice to speech program change the word, and I didn't notice. I said background radiation. That is to say the phenomenon you are discussing has never been observed at a temperature of absolute zero. Temperature is not nothing. So if you have background radiation, you don't have anything that is popping out of nothing.

Again, I said nothing pops out of nothing. And particles popping into existence out of something, is not the same thing as particles popping into existence out of nothing. Please try to respond to the actual arguments I'm making and not inventing a bunch of strawmen.

I mentioned nothing about that. Again please respond to the arguments I'm making, and not the ones I'm not making.
It was my phone that chose interaction, for some weird reason. I meant radiation. Quantum foam isn't background radiation, nor does it require background radiation to exist. Nothing has been observed at absolute zero, since we can't get there. It may be impossible to get there because of all the virtual particles popping in and out of existence. You say that nothing pops out of nothing, and I don't believe that is true. Or to be more accurate, that the nothing for which this is true is not possible, either now or at any time.

Further more, I would argue, though I don't have the tools to prove it, that's physical explanation for a universe erupting out of nothing is orders of magnitude more likely than a disembodied voice saying "Let there be light!". It doesn't matter to me that we don't have an answer yet, or that the semi answers that we do have require mathematical acumen I don't have to understand. I have confidence, faith if you will, that there's no room for the supernatural even in this corner of reality. I am willing to trust the work of those working in this area. The day they all fall on their knees and start praying, is the day I will begin to take the notion seriously.
 
Greater minds than I have figured out and demonstrated this very thing .
If at any time you want to evidence particles popping that would be great. The theory does indeed talk of virtual particles, but theories are cool in that way, they are not evidence.
 
By the way, theology manages to incorporate all and every scientific discovery into itself,
That is utter counterfactual nonsense. The doctrine of "special providence" goes back hundreds of years. The only way to have gotten this question correct is theologically until the 20th century.
as it must do or die,
Except the thing you alledge never happened.
in the process discarding all the theology "truths" it held dear before hand*. Geocentric universe?
In a very real theological sense there's nothing wrong with Geocentrism. That is to say from the perspective of God's message to mankind, it's made clear that man is the focus of God's creation, which includes an ultimate end of redeeming mankind from damnation. So I would say that that point is theologically as true today as it ever was. The error is to think that the focus of God's attention mechanically translates into the movement of celestial bodies. There's no necessary logical connection there. So I really don't accept this as a proper example, it's simply a misapplication of a valid theological but not necessarily scientific truth.
Flat earth?
The Bible does not really conceive of the Earth as flat. So I really don't accept that either. When the Septuagint was created in an effort to bring Jehovah into the pantheon of Greek gods Hebrew cosmology was altered to correspond to Greek cosmology, thereby changing the meaning of several theologically significant words. One of these words was "firmament." The Hebrew word [rakia] means expanse and has nothing to do with solid or domes. For those centuries where Jews were reading their scriptures in Greek they can certainly be forgiven for believing what they were reading because in the Septuagint the cosmology does have a flat earth with a dome over it. But the doctrine of inspiration doesn't claim the translations are inspired. Only the autographs were inspired. Therefore the Septuagint is not inspired the original first draft of Genesis and all the other books of the Old Testament are the only ones that the doctrine of inspiration applies to. Because of this distinction in the doctrine of inspiration, the effect on the doctrine of inerrancy is that our modern translations are not strictly inerrant, because of the follow on translation affect on inerrancy.
I'm not in the least surprised to hear of aping scientific terminology and using quantum mechanics to work out how many angels can dance on the
head of a pin.
That's simply not what you're hearing. I'm just making a rather obvious observation from having read the book "Finding Darwins God." Which is written by a very brilliant evolutionary biologist (Who taught at Brown University of the time) and knew a lot more biology, than he knew theology. He spent several chapters trying to describe special providence, in connection to quantum mechanics which he was making an argument for, but he didn't know enough theology to know that "special providence" was an established theological idea. I happened to already know what Special Providence was, when I came across and read his book. So I could've saved him several thousand words. The point of his book was to defend both the existence of God and evolutionary biology. So no, this observation was not something contrived (contrary to science) by scheming theologians. The professor was a rather ordinary Catholic parishioner who was occasionally asked by a student whether he believed in God. His answer was yes and eventually he felt compelled to write a book to explain how an evolutionary biologist could believe in God. This is something that I find charming about many Catholic parishioners they don't really dig down into their theology, but they end up getting a lot of the right answers almost by osmosis.
*Where it cannot do so, for example evolution, it just pretends that it doesn't matter.
Again our professor above (Kenneth R. Miller) doesn't see any contradiction between evolution and his Catholic faith. The same is true of many Protestants.
 
Look at Ray Epps breaking thru the second barrier at the capitol


Looks like they have another video of Capitol Police beating dead Rosanne Boyland whose body was cremated to hide the fact she was beat. Looks like the J.6 committee either did not know or lied by omission about Epps location at J.6 or Boyland killing

 
Last edited:
Look at Ray Epps breaking thru the second barrier at the capitol


Looks like they have another video of Capitol Police beating dead Rosanne Boyland whose body was cremated to hide the fact she was beat. Looks like the J.6 committee either did not know or lied by omission about Epps location at J.6 or Boyland killing

Here is Boyland video

 
It was not legit so that is a lie. The election was a putsch and therefore illegitimate. It remains illegitimate because the Dems cheated and do not believe in democracy. You must be blind to the very post above yours. Where all your bolsheviks pals were tearing up DC in the 2020 summer of love. Molotov cocktails and containers of urine.

The coup happened prior to that when the Dems rigged the election. Biden may be pseudo-legal but in actual is a counterfeit installed via election fraud in direct violation of the democratic process and consistent with fascism where the ends justify the means. This same group did it before in Ukraine in 2014.


pon the overthrowing of Ukrainian government, there was much celebration in U.S media and political circles. Majority of people in U.S hailed these as a putsch while ignoring the fact that the neo-nazi militias instigated the instability.

I have reason to believe that too many have fallen for Russian produced Rapid Fire Conspiracies:



While politicians in Washington pretended to advocate for democracy, this was all hypocrisy as the motive was different. It should be considered that the government, which U.S was so keen at destabilizing, was a democratically elected one. With disregard to the peace and stability of the nation, U.S politicians were encouraging riots, glorifying violent putsches, as well as destabilizing constitutionally established structures.

Nobody charged.

Well i was wondering because it sounds like you are using the term, in the same manner, blacks are called the N word. Don't see much of a distinction with you.
 
Back
Top