Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

X… Tonight I have a serious question. Not a partisan one. Not a tribal one. A pattern recognition question. Why is it that whenever a movement rises that is hostile to America… Democrats seem to sympathize with it? Why is it that whenever an ideology attacks the nuclear family…... Democrats platform it? Why is it that whenever something directly contradicts what God established about order, structure, responsibility, and moral law… Democrats defend it? At what point does coincidence become alignment? Let’s examine the pattern. When the American flag is burned… who rushes to defend it and who rushes to defend the burner? When border enforcement is demanded… who stands with American sovereignty and who stands with foreign nationals first? When the Black nuclear family collapses from 70 percent married households in the 1960s to roughly 22 percent today… who governed the cities where that collapse happened? When Reverend Raphael Warnock claims moral authority while supporting policies that undermine fatherhood… what does that say about theological coherence? When Amy Klobuchar boasts about legislative wins… yet Minneapolis remains economically stratified and family instability persists… what metric are we actually using to define success? This is not about personalities. It is about incentives. If a political party consistently aligns with positions that weaken national sovereignty, weaken the family, and weaken biblical moral structure… then we have to ask a harder question: Is the outcome accidental… or is the outcome the point? That’s the conversation tonight. Not emotion. Data. Not narratives. Alignment. #AStoneGrooveshow more

A Gene Robinson

142,169 subscribers

243,370 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

“We went through a very dark chapter. But is that who we were meant to be? Is that what Rwandans wanted for themselves? Even if some people at the time wanted it that way, our responsibility today is to say: no. It is our history, but it is not who we should have been, and it is not who we should become. That is what liberation means. It means that, as Rwandans, we freed ourselves. You live for what you truly believe in, to the point where, if necessary, you are ready to die for it. That is where Rwanda stands today, whether some people like it or not.” President Kagame | Unity Club Meeting.

“We went through a very dark chapter. But is that who we were meant to be? Is that what Rwandans wanted for themselves? Even if some people at the time wanted it that way, our responsibility today is to say: no. It is our history, but it is not who we should have been, and it is not who we should become. That is what liberation means. It means that, as Rwandans, we freed ourselves. You live for what you truly believe in, to the point where, if necessary, you are ready to die for it. That is where Rwanda stands today, whether some people like it or not.” President Kagame | Unity Club Meeting.

Presidency | Rwanda

27,475 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Somalians are Africans. Yet in this video, American President Donald Trump labels them “stupid” and “low IQ”. That is not just an insult to one nation, it is an insult to an entire continent, to our dignity, our history, and our humanity. You would never see Europeans applauding a foreign leader who calls them stupid or inferior. Imagine the global outrage if an African leader stood on a platform and declared that an entire European nation was “low IQ” and “stupid”. There would be diplomatic backlash, wall to wall media condemnation, and calls for accountability. The same applies to Arabs and Asians, there is a line of dignity that is defended fiercely when it is crossed. But when it comes to Africans, something deeply troubling happens. We have Africans who will defend, excuse, and even celebrate this man who openly demeans them. It is not normal, it is a crisis of self worth. Because at some point, we must confront an uncomfortable truth. What does it say about us when we rally behind someone who insults our intelligence and our identity? What does it say when we defend him, and attack our own people on his behalf? This is not about politics. It is about dignity and self worth of ourselves as Africans. It is about whether we see ourselves as equal human beings deserving of respect. Supporting someone who calls you “stupid” and “low IQ” is not loyalty, it is idiotic submission. It is internalised contempt for yourself. And perhaps the most painful part is this, that in defending him, some end up reinforcing the very stereotype he projects. Not because it is true, but because choosing to support your own humiliation is the clearest abandonment of self respect. Africans must decide who they are. A people who demand dignity, or a people who defend those who strip it away. You cannot defend a man who calls you stupid without proving his point.

Somalians are Africans. Yet in this video, American President Donald Trump labels them “stupid” and “low IQ”. That is not just an insult to one nation, it is an insult to an entire continent, to our dignity, our history, and our humanity. You would never see Europeans applauding a foreign leader who calls them stupid or inferior. Imagine the global outrage if an African leader stood on a platform and declared that an entire European nation was “low IQ” and “stupid”. There would be diplomatic backlash, wall to wall media condemnation, and calls for accountability. The same applies to Arabs and Asians, there is a line of dignity that is defended fiercely when it is crossed. But when it comes to Africans, something deeply troubling happens. We have Africans who will defend, excuse, and even celebrate this man who openly demeans them. It is not normal, it is a crisis of self worth. Because at some point, we must confront an uncomfortable truth. What does it say about us when we rally behind someone who insults our intelligence and our identity? What does it say when we defend him, and attack our own people on his behalf? This is not about politics. It is about dignity and self worth of ourselves as Africans. It is about whether we see ourselves as equal human beings deserving of respect. Supporting someone who calls you “stupid” and “low IQ” is not loyalty, it is idiotic submission. It is internalised contempt for yourself. And perhaps the most painful part is this, that in defending him, some end up reinforcing the very stereotype he projects. Not because it is true, but because choosing to support your own humiliation is the clearest abandonment of self respect. Africans must decide who they are. A people who demand dignity, or a people who defend those who strip it away. You cannot defend a man who calls you stupid without proving his point.

Hopewell Chin’ono

20,640 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Trump: But when you look at what has happened to the football, soccer in the US. We never call it that because we have another conflict with a thing called football. But when you think about it, this is football, there is no question. We have to come up with another name for the other one. It really does not make sense when you think about it.

Trump: But when you look at what has happened to the football, soccer in the US. We never call it that because we have another conflict with a thing called football. But when you think about it, this is football, there is no question. We have to come up with another name for the other one. It really does not make sense when you think about it.

Acyn

765,793 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

"I think the main eerie similarity is that feeling of rage, rage everywhere against a failing state, a system, a way of government, and it's not a question of politics.... people feel the centre is failing. It's not working, we're not delivering. And the rage is growing... and the question is what to do about it, what can be done about it? And in a way, this film is about what happened 600 years ago. When you have that tinderbox and then it only needs a spark." Paul Greengrass tells me what inspired his latest film 'The Uprising' and why it feels "incredibly contemporary."

"I think the main eerie similarity is that feeling of rage, rage everywhere against a failing state, a system, a way of government, and it's not a question of politics.... people feel the centre is failing. It's not working, we're not delivering. And the rage is growing... and the question is what to do about it, what can be done about it? And in a way, this film is about what happened 600 years ago. When you have that tinderbox and then it only needs a spark." Paul Greengrass tells me what inspired his latest film 'The Uprising' and why it feels "incredibly contemporary."

Christiane Amanpour

34,713 Aufrufe • vor 8 Tagen

$Megyn Kelly: “The coalition that got Trump elected is completely fractured and in smithereens." “It was folly to begin with. It remains folly.” "The question is now not, who has Trump lost. The question is who remains." “We care about what’s happening in Iowa, not Iran.”$

Megyn Kelly: “The coalition that got Trump elected is completely fractured and in smithereens." “It was folly to begin with. It remains folly.” "The question is now not, who has Trump lost. The question is who remains." “We care about what’s happening in Iowa, not Iran.”

RealClearPolitics

119,906 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

[WATCH] The question before the Court is short, and it is a question of law. When a political party has completed the Commission’s prescribed forms and uploaded its lists onto the Commission’s own system before the hour, has that party submitted its lists? The movement says it has. The Commission says it has not. That is a disagreement between a political party and a public institution about what a statute means, and this country built a specialist court for precisely that. The Electoral Court will decide it. The ANC will abide by what the courts decide. I say that now, before judgment, so that nobody need ask afterwards. I want to address the judgment the Electoral Court handed down on Friday in the matter of the UDF Party, because it has been reported as a blow to the ANC. The Court held that the Commission has no power to exempt one party from a deadline that binds all others. The African National Congress agrees with that. We have never asked for an exemption. We have never asked for an extension. We are not asking for one now. What the UDF asked for and what the ANC asks for are different things, and Friday’s judgment is the clearest statement yet of that difference. And to those who have warned the Commission against giving the ANC “preferential treatment”, I say this plainly. The ANC wants none. Whatever relief the Court grants, the movement has asked that it apply to every affected party on the same terms — to the forty-four other parties as much as to us. If the ANC succeeds, two thousand and ninety-three candidates who are not ours succeed with us. That is the only kind of relief this movement would accept. Now let me speak about the Electoral Commission again. The Electoral Commission is a Chapter Nine institution of our Constitution. The African National Congress, more than any other organisation in this country, argued for it, negotiated it and built it. Through seven national elections and six local elections, the ANC has accepted every substantive result the Commission has declared — including the result of 2024, which took from this movement the majority it had held for thirty years. We accepted it on the night. We did not go to a stage and call the Commission a thief. That record is who we are, and it is not for sale in a dispute over six councils. So let me be clear about what the ANC is doing and what it is not doing. The ANC is not attacking the Electoral Commission. The ANC disagrees with the Commission on a point of law, and it has taken that disagreement to the court that Parliament created to hear it. Disagreement in a court is how a democracy respects an institution. Disagreement on a stage, with slogans, is how a democracy weakens one. The movement has chosen the court, respectfully. There are parties in this country who have used this matter to relitigate their own grievances against the Commission. The ANC will not join them, and it will not be used by them. Where the Commission is attacked for doing its work, this movement will defend it, as it has always defended it. We have a responsibility to the institutions of this state that the Commission’s other critics do not carry, and we will carry it even while we are in court against it. And there is a responsibility on all of us that goes beyond this matter. Forty-five parties used one channel and had challenges. That is a fact about the channel, whatever the Court decides about the law. After this election the ANC will go to the Party Liaison Committee and propose, for every party, that the electronic route carry a receipt; that its final step be prescribed in regulation, published in the Gazette, where every party can read it, and not only in software; and that a party be able to see the record of what the Commission holds from it. Not so that the ANC is spared next time. So that no party, large or small, ever again stands where forty-five parties stand this morning. #ANCMediaBriefing #SGMbalulaSpeaks #LGE2026VoteANC

[WATCH] The question before the Court is short, and it is a question of law. When a political party has completed the Commission’s prescribed forms and uploaded its lists onto the Commission’s own system before the hour, has that party submitted its lists? The movement says it has. The Commission says it has not. That is a disagreement between a political party and a public institution about what a statute means, and this country built a specialist court for precisely that. The Electoral Court will decide it. The ANC will abide by what the courts decide. I say that now, before judgment, so that nobody need ask afterwards. I want to address the judgment the Electoral Court handed down on Friday in the matter of the UDF Party, because it has been reported as a blow to the ANC. The Court held that the Commission has no power to exempt one party from a deadline that binds all others. The African National Congress agrees with that. We have never asked for an exemption. We have never asked for an extension. We are not asking for one now. What the UDF asked for and what the ANC asks for are different things, and Friday’s judgment is the clearest statement yet of that difference. And to those who have warned the Commission against giving the ANC “preferential treatment”, I say this plainly. The ANC wants none. Whatever relief the Court grants, the movement has asked that it apply to every affected party on the same terms — to the forty-four other parties as much as to us. If the ANC succeeds, two thousand and ninety-three candidates who are not ours succeed with us. That is the only kind of relief this movement would accept. Now let me speak about the Electoral Commission again. The Electoral Commission is a Chapter Nine institution of our Constitution. The African National Congress, more than any other organisation in this country, argued for it, negotiated it and built it. Through seven national elections and six local elections, the ANC has accepted every substantive result the Commission has declared — including the result of 2024, which took from this movement the majority it had held for thirty years. We accepted it on the night. We did not go to a stage and call the Commission a thief. That record is who we are, and it is not for sale in a dispute over six councils. So let me be clear about what the ANC is doing and what it is not doing. The ANC is not attacking the Electoral Commission. The ANC disagrees with the Commission on a point of law, and it has taken that disagreement to the court that Parliament created to hear it. Disagreement in a court is how a democracy respects an institution. Disagreement on a stage, with slogans, is how a democracy weakens one. The movement has chosen the court, respectfully. There are parties in this country who have used this matter to relitigate their own grievances against the Commission. The ANC will not join them, and it will not be used by them. Where the Commission is attacked for doing its work, this movement will defend it, as it has always defended it. We have a responsibility to the institutions of this state that the Commission’s other critics do not carry, and we will carry it even while we are in court against it. And there is a responsibility on all of us that goes beyond this matter. Forty-five parties used one channel and had challenges. That is a fact about the channel, whatever the Court decides about the law. After this election the ANC will go to the Party Liaison Committee and propose, for every party, that the electronic route carry a receipt; that its final step be prescribed in regulation, published in the Gazette, where every party can read it, and not only in software; and that a party be able to see the record of what the Commission holds from it. Not so that the ANC is spared next time. So that no party, large or small, ever again stands where forty-five parties stand this morning. #ANCMediaBriefing #SGMbalulaSpeaks #LGE2026VoteANC

ANC SECRETARY GENERAL | Fikile Mbalula

14,268 Aufrufe • vor 11 Tagen

.Karoline Leavitt: "...this is a president who is serious about taking down illegitimate regimes, and who is also serious about securing the security of the United States of America, including the Venezuelan American people…this is something that not just Republicans and President Trump have talked about for a very long time, but it is also something that Democrats have advocated for."

.Karoline Leavitt: "...this is a president who is serious about taking down illegitimate regimes, and who is also serious about securing the security of the United States of America, including the Venezuelan American people…this is something that not just Republicans and President Trump have talked about for a very long time, but it is also something that Democrats have advocated for."

Department of State

20,835 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Senator Eric Schmitt perfectly explains why the Senate must pass the SAVE America Act If says if this is not passed, it’s likely the end of our Republic “The Senate is not a museum. It is not a ‘Visiting angels retirement village’ for proceduralism. It is not here merely to confirm nominees, pass omnibuses and fund the legislative achievements of long dead men while the living nation loses confidence in its own government. The United States Senate is here to legislate in defense of the American people. The Senate is here to draw lines. The Senate is here to make judgments. The Senate is here to govern. So the question for this chamber is really simple. Are we here to govern or merely preside? Are we here to act for the people, or simply explain why action is impossible? And republics don't usually fall in one dramatic stroke. They weaken when truth is no longer defended. They weaken when citizenship is diluted. They weaken when institutions lose the will to govern, they weaken when elites ask ordinary people to live under conditions they themselves know are disordered. That is what this debate is really about. It's about whether the country still defends first principles. It's about whether the Senate understands what time it is.“ ‘What time it is’ = Pass this or it’s over

Senator Eric Schmitt perfectly explains why the Senate must pass the SAVE America Act If says if this is not passed, it’s likely the end of our Republic “The Senate is not a museum. It is not a ‘Visiting angels retirement village’ for proceduralism. It is not here merely to confirm nominees, pass omnibuses and fund the legislative achievements of long dead men while the living nation loses confidence in its own government. The United States Senate is here to legislate in defense of the American people. The Senate is here to draw lines. The Senate is here to make judgments. The Senate is here to govern. So the question for this chamber is really simple. Are we here to govern or merely preside? Are we here to act for the people, or simply explain why action is impossible? And republics don't usually fall in one dramatic stroke. They weaken when truth is no longer defended. They weaken when citizenship is diluted. They weaken when institutions lose the will to govern, they weaken when elites ask ordinary people to live under conditions they themselves know are disordered. That is what this debate is really about. It's about whether the country still defends first principles. It's about whether the Senate understands what time it is.“ ‘What time it is’ = Pass this or it’s over

Wall Street Apes

33,703 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Utopia is not the standard. Reality is. Every civilisation has sins if you judge it by today’s moral standards. You can build an entire career doing nothing but listing them. That is easy. The harder question and the only one that matters is this: compared to actual, existing alternatives, who has done better? I am not claiming the West is perfect. It is not. No society is. But if you are honest about measurable progress on rights, equality, and self-correction, it is still ahead of every other major system in the world today. So stop asking "is it perfect?" That is a childish question. Ask: "compared to what?"

Utopia is not the standard. Reality is. Every civilisation has sins if you judge it by today’s moral standards. You can build an entire career doing nothing but listing them. That is easy. The harder question and the only one that matters is this: compared to actual, existing alternatives, who has done better? I am not claiming the West is perfect. It is not. No society is. But if you are honest about measurable progress on rights, equality, and self-correction, it is still ahead of every other major system in the world today. So stop asking "is it perfect?" That is a childish question. Ask: "compared to what?"

Konstantin Kisin

169,079 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Alexander Stubb Alexander Stubb speaking in Kyiv today: ▪️ It is not Russia who decides on EU membership, it is the European Union who does that. ▪️ It is not Russia that decides on NATO membership, it is the alliance itself. ▪️ It is not Russia that decides on what Ukraine has by its border, when, where and how. ▪️ It's not Russia that decides on European security arrangements. We already have a European security order and should stick to it.

Alexander Stubb Alexander Stubb speaking in Kyiv today: ▪️ It is not Russia who decides on EU membership, it is the European Union who does that. ▪️ It is not Russia that decides on NATO membership, it is the alliance itself. ▪️ It is not Russia that decides on what Ukraine has by its border, when, where and how. ▪️ It's not Russia that decides on European security arrangements. We already have a European security order and should stick to it.

Anton Gerashchenko

761,373 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Lolita is a story about a man who walked into a house that was already a little lonely, and a girl who had no say in who got a key. Charlotte wants to be chosen. That part is human. She is a widow, she is proud, she is hungry for a life that is not only bills and a daughter who is growing away from her. Humbert sees that hunger and uses it. He does not fall into the family. He studies it. The mother is the door. The child is the room. Dolores is not the author of what happens to her. That is the whole point, and it is the part adaptations keep almost dropping. She is a kid in a small world …camps, cars, motels, a mother who wants a wedding more than she wants to look again at the man she let in. When Charlotte is gone, there is no adult left whose job is her. There is only him, and the road, and the lie that this is a romance because he is the one talking. Why did the adult who was meant to protect the child,preyed on her? He was supposed to be a wall not an opening. In the book,the girl was only 12yrs old.

Lolita is a story about a man who walked into a house that was already a little lonely, and a girl who had no say in who got a key. Charlotte wants to be chosen. That part is human. She is a widow, she is proud, she is hungry for a life that is not only bills and a daughter who is growing away from her. Humbert sees that hunger and uses it. He does not fall into the family. He studies it. The mother is the door. The child is the room. Dolores is not the author of what happens to her. That is the whole point, and it is the part adaptations keep almost dropping. She is a kid in a small world …camps, cars, motels, a mother who wants a wedding more than she wants to look again at the man she let in. When Charlotte is gone, there is no adult left whose job is her. There is only him, and the road, and the lie that this is a romance because he is the one talking. Why did the adult who was meant to protect the child,preyed on her? He was supposed to be a wall not an opening. In the book,the girl was only 12yrs old.

LOLO

3,175,963 Aufrufe • vor 17 Tagen

In 2000, the average family paid about $6,000 a year for health insurance. Today, it is nearly $27,000. That is not inflation. That is Obamacare. Republicans cannot just oppose it. We have to replace it with something that actually works.

In 2000, the average family paid about $6,000 a year for health insurance. Today, it is nearly $27,000. That is not inflation. That is Obamacare. Republicans cannot just oppose it. We have to replace it with something that actually works.

Rep. Eric Burlison

1,348,720 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

🚨You ever notice something that just doesn’t sit right… Every time America is in a conflict… every time strength is required… there’s a loud group inside this country that instinctively moves against it. The Democrats. Not cautiously… not critically… but reflexively. And it raises a real question… When did opposing America become the default position… and why does it always seem tied to opposing one man more than defending the nation itself? At some point… this stops being about policy differences… …and starts looking like something deeper. #SilentMajoritySpeaks #AStoneGroove

🚨You ever notice something that just doesn’t sit right… Every time America is in a conflict… every time strength is required… there’s a loud group inside this country that instinctively moves against it. The Democrats. Not cautiously… not critically… but reflexively. And it raises a real question… When did opposing America become the default position… and why does it always seem tied to opposing one man more than defending the nation itself? At some point… this stops being about policy differences… …and starts looking like something deeper. #SilentMajoritySpeaks #AStoneGroove

A Gene Robinson

12,084 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Freedom is one of the most cherished blessings we enjoy. It is woven into the fabric of our nation and defended by generations who understood that liberty comes at a great cost. Yet freedom is more than the absence of restraint - it is the opportunity to choose what is right. The prodigal son demanded freedom from responsibility and discovered that unchecked freedom leads to destruction. True freedom is not the right to do as we want; it is the right to do as we ought. Every freedom carries responsibility, and every choice carries consequences. As believers, we must recognize that freedom is a gift from God that must be stewarded wisely. We are called to stand against hatred, defend truth, and live in a way that blesses those around us. Our lives are connected, and what affects one affects all. Freedom is not absolute, nor is it free. It demands vigilance, responsibility, and moral courage. If we fail to use our freedom to defend what is right, we risk losing the very freedoms we treasure. Let us thank God for liberty, use it wisely, and honor Him with the choices we make every day.

Freedom is one of the most cherished blessings we enjoy. It is woven into the fabric of our nation and defended by generations who understood that liberty comes at a great cost. Yet freedom is more than the absence of restraint - it is the opportunity to choose what is right. The prodigal son demanded freedom from responsibility and discovered that unchecked freedom leads to destruction. True freedom is not the right to do as we want; it is the right to do as we ought. Every freedom carries responsibility, and every choice carries consequences. As believers, we must recognize that freedom is a gift from God that must be stewarded wisely. We are called to stand against hatred, defend truth, and live in a way that blesses those around us. Our lives are connected, and what affects one affects all. Freedom is not absolute, nor is it free. It demands vigilance, responsibility, and moral courage. If we fail to use our freedom to defend what is right, we risk losing the very freedoms we treasure. Let us thank God for liberty, use it wisely, and honor Him with the choices we make every day.

Pastor John Hagee

15,246 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

"What a terrible error it is to go after anybody who has legitimate questions about the interaction between the United States and not only a foreign state but a particular administration that has a very hard line bent within that foreign state. You're allowed to have questions. You're an American. That's one of the great things about it. You're allowed to have questions. You're allowed to ask any question you want. And anybody who wants to say that the reason you can't ask that question is because you're revealing a horrible defect in character, or defect of character, is running exactly the risk of creating the enemy, effectively calling it forth." - Bret Weinstein

"What a terrible error it is to go after anybody who has legitimate questions about the interaction between the United States and not only a foreign state but a particular administration that has a very hard line bent within that foreign state. You're allowed to have questions. You're an American. That's one of the great things about it. You're allowed to have questions. You're allowed to ask any question you want. And anybody who wants to say that the reason you can't ask that question is because you're revealing a horrible defect in character, or defect of character, is running exactly the risk of creating the enemy, effectively calling it forth." - Bret Weinstein

The DarkHorse Podcast

212,283 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

🚨 SEC. MARCO RUBIO JUST DROPPED THE MIC "We've had EVERY American president says, oh, Iran can't have a nuclear weapon! And this is the FIRST American president that's actually trying to DO something concrete about it!" 🔥 "I don't know who would disagree with that! I mean, it's an important thing that has to be confronted." "Everybody agrees that Iran having a nuclear weapon is unacceptable. I mean, I don't know of anyone who thinks it's a good idea for Iran to have a nuclear weapon except the Ayatollah!" "So I think the question is, what do you do about it? And the president's actually trying to DO something about it." 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

🚨 SEC. MARCO RUBIO JUST DROPPED THE MIC "We've had EVERY American president says, oh, Iran can't have a nuclear weapon! And this is the FIRST American president that's actually trying to DO something concrete about it!" 🔥 "I don't know who would disagree with that! I mean, it's an important thing that has to be confronted." "Everybody agrees that Iran having a nuclear weapon is unacceptable. I mean, I don't know of anyone who thinks it's a good idea for Iran to have a nuclear weapon except the Ayatollah!" "So I think the question is, what do you do about it? And the president's actually trying to DO something about it." 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

Eric Daugherty

20,200 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Flashback: Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, vows to destroy the US in the name of Islam: “Death to America Is Not Just a Slogan, It Is a Policy”. How is it that people still believe Israel is the one seeking war with Iran, when it is Iran’s regime that is actively developing nuclear weapons and openly threatening to wipe both Israel and the United States off the map? At what point does the world acknowledge that the aggressor is the one making genocidal threats and racing toward nuclear capability — not the country trying to prevent another catastrophe?

Flashback: Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, vows to destroy the US in the name of Islam: “Death to America Is Not Just a Slogan, It Is a Policy”. How is it that people still believe Israel is the one seeking war with Iran, when it is Iran’s regime that is actively developing nuclear weapons and openly threatening to wipe both Israel and the United States off the map? At what point does the world acknowledge that the aggressor is the one making genocidal threats and racing toward nuclear capability — not the country trying to prevent another catastrophe?

Liza Rosen

769,325 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Kennedy: There's this little game where the Democrats want the nominee to use the magic words that Trump lost the election and the nominees are understandably, in my opinion, don't want to play that game. Hunt: How is it game? It’s just what happened. Kennedy: No, it is a game. It’s a game of words. Hunt: What does it say about where we are that you think that this is a game of words. I mean, when did this get so hard? Kennedy: The Democrats have made it hard

Kennedy: There's this little game where the Democrats want the nominee to use the magic words that Trump lost the election and the nominees are understandably, in my opinion, don't want to play that game. Hunt: How is it game? It’s just what happened. Kennedy: No, it is a game. It’s a game of words. Hunt: What does it say about where we are that you think that this is a game of words. I mean, when did this get so hard? Kennedy: The Democrats have made it hard

Acyn

414,150 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten