Here's one that's harder to spot, but if you do learn about it, just say "No" and walk away: He has a Twitter anon. You can look at his content if you need to, but you're not likely to be surprised at what you see. Just knowing he has a Twitter anon account is probably enough.

Manhunter is 40. As such, one of the most underrated films of Michael Mann’s career is returning to U.S. theaters on July 24 in a new "Final Cut" which features a supervised 4K restoration and updated audio. Ask me if I’ll be there. My answer is an obvious “yes”. Cinema lives.

This is nearly the exact opposite of the truth btw. Wokeness at its core was about instituting an ancien-regime style system of particular feudal privileges and exemptions to various corporate groups - a much better fit to a monarchical, patchwork state like Canada.

Greenwald just said the quiet part out loud: The US president wants to end a war. He can't. Because a foreign lobby - and a foreign government - have more power over American foreign policy than the American people, Congress, or the president himself

This is stunningly dishonest. It's because Israel wants Iran GONE, not without a nuclear weapon which of course they did not have and were not building before the war.

CBS News boss Bari Weiss poised to oversee CNN editorial operations: report trib.al/5NN3tcd

Another horrific event. Another shitlib refusing to own the predicted and inevitable outcome of their own ideals.

Faith is the “substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.” What’s the evidence of Mormonism’s claims? Every historical claim of the Bible is in two categories; that which is proven, the which has not been proven yet. Nothing is disproven. Not a thing. The Bible is so infinitely accurate a historic account that it is seen as an authoritative witness by non-believers in the realms of history, archeology, and anthropology. Easily, it is the most used and trusted historical survey of the ancient world. For example, the Hittites were called a fabrication until 1906, when their entire capital city turned up in Turkey. Belshazzar was called fictional until a cylinder inscription confirmed he co-reigned with Nabonidus exactly as Daniel describes. The Pool of Bethesda in John 5 was considered a theological symbol until archaeologists dug it up in Jerusalem with its five porticoes precisely as the text describes. The Tel Dan Stele, discovered in 1993, contains the explicit phrase “House of David” in Aramaic – a direct extra-biblical confirmation of the Davidic dynasty that critical scholars had spent generations calling a legend. Pontius Pilate was considered a literary device until a dedicatory stone bearing his name and title surfaced at Caesarea Maritima in 1961. The Ebla tablets corroborated patriarchal names, customs, and cities from Genesis that had been written off as late priestly invention. No other ancient text - not Homer, not Herodotus, not Thucydides - has survived the archaeological pressure test the way Scripture has, and the digs are still running. In juxtaposition, the Book of Mormon is trusted by exactly no one in those fields, because it’s never been substantiated by the smallest detail. There is not a single archeological discovery supporting the Book of Mormon. I can have faith that what is not yet proven in the Bible is true, because it’s been proven true, a myriad of times. But Mormons have nothing but the word of a man proven to have prophesied falsely. By the standards of Deuteronomy 18, Joseph Smith should have been stoned to death. Moses gave Israel a simple test: if the prophet speaks and the thing does not happen, God did not send him, and put him down like a dog. Smith’s 1832 prophecy in Doctrine and Covenants 84 declared by “the word of the Lord” that a temple would be built in Independence, Missouri, within his own generation. The temple was never built, and the lot in Independence, MO sits empty to this day. Smith also prophesied in 1843 that if Congress did not redress the grievances of the Saints, God would come out of His hiding place and “vex the nation in His hot displeasure.” Congress declined to act, and God did not vex the nation on schedule. Smith was dead within the year, which the prophet didn’t see coming (Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Jesus saw it coming). Smith’s 1835 prophecy declared that the Lord would come within 56 years, meaning no later than 1891. Don’t recall that one happening. The truth is, finding accurate prophecies about the future from Smith is as difficult as finding accurate claims about the past. Past, present, future, the man was full of lies. So while faith does not require evidence, when your religion’s unverified claims come from someone with a track record of being wrong about every possible timeline, maybe rethink your religion. But my person favorite is that the Book of Mormon claims to have been written up to 400AD, but quotes verbatim from the 1611 KJV, including KJV translation errors and italicized words that the KJV translators themselves added for English readability and marked in italics to indicate they had no Hebrew or Greek equivalent. Those italicized words show up in the Book of Mormon as if they were on the original plates. Oopsie.

For six installments, the question has been whether the church inherited the same Old Testament the apostles used. That question is no longer theoretical. The evidence has been laid out. The citations have been provided. The church fathers have testified. The Dead Sea Scrolls have spoken. The translation committees have quietly acknowledged the problem in hundreds of footnotes. At some point, continuing to debate whether the issue exists becomes a way of avoiding the more uncomfortable question: what are you going to do with the information now that you have it? The answer is surprisingly simple. Stop outsourcing your curiosity. The tools that were once available only to seminary professors and manuscript specialists now sit on your phone. You can compare the Septuagint to the Masoretic Text. You can read the Dead Sea Scrolls. You can examine the passages the apostles quoted. You can see where the translation committees depart from the text they officially claim to follow. The gatekeepers lost control of this information years ago. The greatest obstacle to understanding the textual history of Scripture is no longer access. It is the assumption that someone else has already done the homework for you. That is the purpose of this final installment. Not to make one more argument, but to put the research directly into your hands. The Lexham English Septuagint. The NETS translation. Brenton's Septuagint. The Orthodox Study Bible. The Dead Sea Scrolls Digital Library. The Hexapla Project. Blue Letter Bible. Bible Hub. Sefaria. They are the maps, archives, witness statements, and primary-source documents that allow a Protestant to do what Protestants claim to value most: test every tradition against the evidence and follow the truth wherever it leads. The previous five installments established the case, this final installment hands you the keys to the evidence locker and invites you to start opening boxes." Read more at Insight to Incite. Link in bio. Audio version available.

Trump issued a public warning to Israel last week not to bomb Beirut so he could negotiatiate a deal with the Iranians, but Israel bombed Beirut anyway. Point 1: The Chomskyites will eventually have to concede that the tail wags the dog - i.e. Israel has more influence over the US than vice versa. Point 2: The retarded philosemites who desperately try to pin Israel's intransigence on Netanyahu can't explain why this exact scenario played out in 1982 under Menachem Begin. They can only hope you are ignorant of history. From Ronald Reagan's autobiography, An American Life: "On August 4, two days after I'd met with Israeli Foreign Minister, Yitzhak Shamir in the Oval Office and appealed to him in the strongest words I could think of for Israel to use restraint, I was awakened at 6:30am by my national security advisor. He said that the Israelis had just moved into new positions within West Beirut and were shelling the city with a savage ferocity that was killing more and more civilians. Outraged, Phil Habib telephoned me from Beirut and said that the shelling was so intense and so unrelenting that he was unable to get to meetings he had scheduled to negotiate a settlement to the dispute. I decided to appeal personally to Menachem Begin to stop the fighting and abide by the ceasefire so that Habib could complete his work. I suggested to Begin that if he didn't, he could expect a drastic change in Israel's relationship with the United States. 'This disproportionate bombing of West Beirut,' my message stated, was exacting 'unacceptable human costs and making negotiations impossible.' If it continued, I said, it would be impossible for me to defend the proposition that Israel used American-made weapons for defensive purposes only...Each time I communicated with them, however, I emphasized my personal committment and that of the United States to the support of Israel. I supported its right to defend itself against attack, but appealed for Israel not to go on the offensive unless it was the victim of a provocation of such magnitude that the world would easily understand its right to retaliate. Israel's response was, in effect: Mind your own business. It is up to Israel alone to decide what it must do to ensure its survival." It is important to understand that Reagan is candidly admitting that Israel was using American-made weapons for offensive purposes, which is a violation of the Foreign Assistance Act, Arms Export Control Act, Leahy Laws, etc. In fact, Reagan admitted Israel was in violation in his autobiography: "Technically, Israel had violated an agreement with us not to use US-made weapons for offensive purposes, and some cabinet members wanted me to lean hard on Israel because it had broken this pledge. We sent a note to the Israeli government criticizing the raid, and delayed shipment of several additional military aircraft as a show of our displeasure." Point 3: It should now be clear why Israel favors moving away from military aid to a "partnership." Israel wants to remove what they call the "golden handcuffs" so they can cleanse all of their neighbors without the US using its military aid as a carrot to exert any influence over it. However, abandoning aid in favor of a partnership creates a dependency on Israel for US national security. This will further tie the US's hands in restraining Israel so as to avoid any disruptions to its own defense ecosystem.