Zone1 Pope Leo calls for peace, gives Putin a pass and criticizes Trump. That is politics, not a call for peace.

[Meriweather]

This is directly lifted from Pope Leo's original prayer for peace 3 days ago:

"It is here that we find a bulwark against that delusion of omnipotence that surrounds us and is becoming increasingly unpredictable and aggressive."

This is an obvious swipe at President Trump because there is nothing increasingly unpredictable about Putin or any other leaders behind other wars around the world. Secondly, he could have immediately diffused the situation by saying "I am against all war and all violence whether it is occurring in Russia, Ukraine, Iran, Yemen anywhere." He did not do that and chose to be confrontational with President Trump.

We will have to agree to disagree on Pope Leo.

First, the most namby-pamby saying ever is that mealy, "Let's agree to disagree." More simply stated is, We will continue to disagree. No need for anyone to treat someone as a delicate flower who cannot stand and see a disagreement for what it is. (That saying is a serious pet peeve of mine. )

More to the point, did you read Pope Leo's words from start to finish? He was speaking of all wars, taking care not to focus on one. However, what is the war front and center at this time? IF he wanted to send a message to President Trump, rather a sneaky tact to take, wouldn't you say? And IF President Trump wanted to take it personally, or IF people wanted him to take it personally what would be the expected reaction? Note the Pope was pleased with the cease fire and negotiations which was announced before the Pope's talk.

IF the Pope is trying to turn Americans against their President--or assist those who are already against him--wouldn't you agree that is out of line for a Pope to do, given his (supposedly non-political) position? The Pope, you will note, hasten to say he was merely following the Gospel and Jesus' wish for peace to come upon his followers.

Now the media is keeping things stirred up--for the media's benefit.

As I said previously, popes need to stay out of political affairs and focus on their congregation and the lives, the personal doings, of these individuals. If the Pope was trying to get a message to President Trump, then he should have picked up the phone. But then....that would have been political, wouldn't it. And thus, out of line for a pope.

Meanwhile, what I see in the news are people following the "IF" perspective that suits them. The Pope may have intended to be a calming influence, and I certainly hope this was the case. Since we don't know, what is obvious is that everyone is jumping to their individual conclusions. If the Pope hoped to bring peace to the world with his words, then I imagine these last few days have been a disappointment. And if he is patting himself on the back for calling for peace despite the turmoil, then I am hugely disappointed since it would confirm he is acting as a political figure instead of a pope.

 

[ding]

He killed a tyrant.

And believing that makes you retarded.

Not surprising you are against that.

I'm against libertarians and their love for anarchy. Even the far far left are better than them. At least they believe in morals even if they get them wrong.

 

[TNHarley]

And believing that makes you retarded.

I'm against libertarians and their love for anarchy. Even the far far left are better than them. At least they believe in morals even if they get them wrong.

Yeah imprisoning people for words is fine. Trashing several amendments of the bill of rights is fine. Ignoring the SC telling you to slow down is fine. Shutting down media outlets is fine. Scorched earth is fine. Yeah, thats not tyranny at all.

Its ok you dont understand what you are talking about. You usually dont.

 

[ding]

Yeah imprisoning people for words is fine. Trashing several amendments of the bill of rights is fine. Ignoring the SC telling you to slow down is fine. Shutting down media outlets is fine. Scorched earth is fine. Yeah, thats not tyranny at all.

Its ok you dont understand what you are talking about. You usually dont.

You hate liberty. You just don't know it.

 

[TNHarley]

You hate liberty. You just don't know it.

 

[ding]

John Wilkes Booth is universally regarded as a villain and assassin, not a national hero, for killing President Abraham Lincoln in 1865. As a Confederate sympathizer and white supremacist, Booth murdered Lincoln to aid the South and restore slavery. He died a violent death in infamy.

Key points about John Wilkes Booth:

• The Act: Booth shot Lincoln on April 14, 1865, at Ford's Theatre to stop the abolition of slavery and restart the Civil War.
• Motivations: He held extremist views, strongly supported slavery, and was enraged by the Confederacy’s loss.
• Self-View: Despite his actions, Booth saw himself as a patriot and a hero akin to Brutus, believing he was acting on divine, "higher law" to eliminate a "tyrant".
• Historical Legacy: Booth is not considered a hero but a criminal, having gained "eternal scorn and infamy" for his role in disrupting the government.

The overwhelming consensus among historians and the American public is that Booth's actions were acts of terrorism and treason, aimed at destroying democratic leadership.

 

[ding]

Yeah imprisoning people for words is fine. Trashing several amendments of the bill of rights is fine. Ignoring the SC telling you to slow down is fine. Shutting down media outlets is fine. Scorched earth is fine. Yeah, thats not tyranny at all.

Its ok you dont understand what you are talking about. You usually dont.

Is that why you believe he assassinated Lincoln? Maybe it's you who doesn't know what he is talking about.

 

[TNHarley]

Is that why you believe he assassinated Lincoln? Maybe it's you who doesn't know what he is talking about.

He killed him because he was a tyrant. You even just posted that from your "I cant think at all so i will copy AI" paste.

 

[ding]

He killed him because he was a tyrant. You even just posted that from your "I cant think at all so i will copy AI" paste.

Booth killed Lincoln because Booth was a white supremacist who wanted to restart the war.

I think it's fabulous logic that a libertarian supports assassinating elected presidents. It really shows their true understanding of liberty. Or maybe you're just a white supremacists who wished he still could own blacks instead of a retarded libertarian. I guess you could be both.

 

[TNHarley]

Booth killed Lincoln because Booth was a white supremacist who wanted to restart the war.

I think it's fabulous logic that a libertarian supports assassinating elected presidents. It really shows their true understanding of liberty. Or maybe you're just a white supremacists who wished he still could own blacks.

I am going by his diary. Not some retarded boomer on the internet.
Of course, there is no evidence for that, although his motives were tied to the outcome of the war.
Im not a libertarian, but i am close to them.
So you dont think tyrants should be ended? You think dictators having people killed, property destroyed, rights gone etc is fine? Do you think the people were wrong when they killed benito? Hideki Tojo?
Dumbass.

 

[ding]

I am going by his diary. Not some retarded boomer on the internet.
Of course, there is no evidence for that, although his motives were tied to the outcome of the war.
Im not a libertarian, but i am close to them.
So you dont think tyrants should be ended? You think dictators having people killed, property destroyed, rights gone etc is fine? Do you think the people were wrong when they killed benito? Hideki Tojo?
Dumbass.

You are going by his diary?

Keep praising Booth as a hero.

 

[TNHarley]

You are going by his diary?

Keep praising Booth as a hero.

Yeah, do you think he was lying to himself?

 

[TNHarley]

Keep praising Booth as a hero.

I will

 

[ding]

I am going by his diary. Not some retarded boomer on the internet.

You really are retarded.

Evidence that John Wilkes Booth was a white supremacist includes his written declaration that "this country was formed for the white not for the black man" and his ardent support for slavery. He was enraged by Abraham Lincoln’s advocacy for Black suffrage, vowed to prevent it, and held dehumanizing views, referring to Black people as "monkeys" or "apes".

Key evidence of Booth's white supremacist beliefs and actions include:

• Written Ideology: In a 1864 letter, Booth stated his belief that slavery was "one of the greatest blessings... that God ever bestowed upon a favored nation".
• Reaction to Lincoln's Final Speech: On April 11, 1865, upon hearing Lincoln suggest voting rights for Black soldiers and "very intelligent" Black men, Booth told co-conspirator Lewis Powell, "That means ****** citizenship. Now, by God, I'll put him through. That is the last speech he will ever make".
• Opposition to John Brown: In 1859, Booth attended the hanging of abolitionist John Brown, taking care to dress in a military uniform to ensure he was on the side of those suppressing the abolitionist cause.
• Support for the Confederacy: Raised in Maryland, a slave state, Booth was a staunch supporter of the Confederacy and believed in the forced subjugation of Black people.
• Role in Assassination: Booth viewed his murder of Lincoln as a "patriotic" act designed to save the nation from racial integration and uphold white supremacy.

 

[ding]

I will

Most white supremacists do.

 

[ding]

Yeah, do you think he was lying to himself?

I think you are selective in what you are sharing. Booth was an avowed white supremacist.

 

[TNHarley]

You really are retarded.

Evidence that John Wilkes Booth was a white supremacist includes his written declaration that "this country was formed for the white not for the black man" and his ardent support for slavery. He was enraged by Abraham Lincoln’s advocacy for Black suffrage, vowed to prevent it, and held dehumanizing views, referring to Black people as "monkeys" or "apes".

Key evidence of Booth's white supremacist beliefs and actions include:

• Written Ideology: In a 1864 letter, Booth stated his belief that slavery was "one of the greatest blessings... that God ever bestowed upon a favored nation".
• Reaction to Lincoln's Final Speech: On April 11, 1865, upon hearing Lincoln suggest voting rights for Black soldiers and "very intelligent" Black men, Booth told co-conspirator Lewis Powell, "That means ****** citizenship. Now, by God, I'll put him through. That is the last speech he will ever make".
• Opposition to John Brown: In 1859, Booth attended the hanging of abolitionist John Brown, taking care to dress in a military uniform to ensure he was on the side of those suppressing the abolitionist cause.
• Support for the Confederacy: Raised in Maryland, a slave state, Booth was a staunch supporter of the Confederacy and believed in the forced subjugation of Black people.
• Role in Assassination: Booth viewed his murder of Lincoln as a "patriotic" act designed to save the nation from racial integration and uphold white supremacy.

Yes, he was racist. So was Lincoln.
So what about bennito and tojo? Should they have not executed them? After all, they were ONLY tyrants responsible for much death and destruction. They didnt deserve that, right?

 

[TNHarley]

I think you are selective in what you are sharing. Booth was an avowed white supremacist.

I am aware. So was Lincoln.

 

[TNHarley]

Most white supremacists do.

Grow up

 

[ding]

Yes, he was racist. So was Lincoln.

Lincoln didn't assassinate a sitting president.

JWB didn't assassinate Lincoln because of abuse of powers. JWB assassinated Lincoln because JWB was a white supremacist who wanted to restart the war. A notion you scoffed at earlier and now are accepting. You really are retarded.

So what about bennito and tojo? Should they have not executed them? After all, they were ONLY tyrants responsible for much death and destruction. They didnt deserve that, right?

Who the **** cares about bennito and tojo? This is an even a more retarded argument than your last one.