watch here as @DanaBashCNN’s entire body seems to short circuit as brad suggests, in the softest way possible, that palestinians are human beings pic.twitter.com/g08Lr4uHtx
— matt bernstein (@mattxiv) July 11, 2026
Tucker's attempt to normalize Nick Fuentes
353,708 Views |
4185 Replies |
Last: 1 hr ago by historian
Tucker Carlson goes nuclear on Trump: "It's such a betrayal. How could you betray us? It's the betrayal that make it so bitter for people like me. In the end it's all about crypto scams and wars for Israel. Hiding the Epstein stuff, yelling at anyone who asks questions about… pic.twitter.com/B8YfPxlQzl
— Reggie B. (@reggiebblue) July 11, 2026
historian said:— The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) July 10, 2026
This could feasibly apply to Tucker Carlson as well.
I think you just cracked the code on barbearian
Realitybites said:Mothra said:Realitybites said:Quote:
As for the paving question, you're assuming that because something looks unusual to you, it must indicate a cover-up. What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered? Suspicion isn't evidence. If there is proof that procedures were violated or evidence was destroyed, let's look at it. Otherwise, you're treating an unanswered question as proof of a conspiracy.
Because reality doesn't work like a TV show.
"For a murder, you're talking about a much more comprehensive and therefore much more time-consuming examination. For a start, everything in the scene is first photographed and videoed. And the scene would extend to all the possible exits, entrances, and routes between.
Then we get down to the details. Every footprint, partial footprint, trace of footprint, must be diagrammed, measured, photographed with scales. Every area of blood has to be assessed is it spatter? Drops? Smears? - measured, diagrammed, and photographed. Blood samples have to be taken from all areas and the exact position must be recorded, both in diagrams and photographs.
You've got several hours work there alone, and not just for one person either. Two CSI's at a minimum, three more likely, and a Crime Scene Manager deciding strategy and directing operations. So far, you haven't even begun on fingerprinting, or recovering items for lab work.
Most murder scenes will take several days to process properly. Quite apart from the work done by the CSI's, outside experts will often be called in. A Pathologist, to look at the body in situ before it's taken for a full post mortem. A Blood Pattern Analysis expert. A Ballistics expert if a gun was involved. If a gun has been left at the scene, that requires special treatment from a Firearms Officer. And so on."
Let me ask again. Maybe I'll get an answer this time.
What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered?
When there is a departure from normal procedure, it is up to the deviant to produce proof. The fact that this procedure normally takes days is proof enough. So, was the scene of the crime tested for explosive residue? Or was it hurriedly paved over to conceal any evidence of an alternative method of Charlie Kirk's assassination?
Translation: "I have zero evidentiary support confirming my suspicions."
Meanwhile, judging from the pretrial, we have numerous confessions, numerous video, ballistics and DNA evidence linking Robinson to the crime. But you ignore that because the site was paved over after the shooting.
I'd suggest spending more time in reality, and less time listening to the lunatic who thinks Charlie visits her in dreams.
Realitybites said:Mothra said:Realitybites said:Quote:
As for the paving question, you're assuming that because something looks unusual to you, it must indicate a cover-up. What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered? Suspicion isn't evidence. If there is proof that procedures were violated or evidence was destroyed, let's look at it. Otherwise, you're treating an unanswered question as proof of a conspiracy.
Because reality doesn't work like a TV show.
"For a murder, you're talking about a much more comprehensive and therefore much more time-consuming examination. For a start, everything in the scene is first photographed and videoed. And the scene would extend to all the possible exits, entrances, and routes between.
Then we get down to the details. Every footprint, partial footprint, trace of footprint, must be diagrammed, measured, photographed with scales. Every area of blood has to be assessed is it spatter? Drops? Smears? - measured, diagrammed, and photographed. Blood samples have to be taken from all areas and the exact position must be recorded, both in diagrams and photographs.
You've got several hours work there alone, and not just for one person either. Two CSI's at a minimum, three more likely, and a Crime Scene Manager deciding strategy and directing operations. So far, you haven't even begun on fingerprinting, or recovering items for lab work.
Most murder scenes will take several days to process properly. Quite apart from the work done by the CSI's, outside experts will often be called in. A Pathologist, to look at the body in situ before it's taken for a full post mortem. A Blood Pattern Analysis expert. A Ballistics expert if a gun was involved. If a gun has been left at the scene, that requires special treatment from a Firearms Officer. And so on."
Let me ask again. Maybe I'll get an answer this time.
What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered?
When there is a departure from normal procedure, it is up to the deviant to produce proof. The fact that this procedure normally takes days is proof enough. So, was the scene of the crime tested for explosive residue? Or was it hurriedly paved over to conceal any evidence of an alternative method of Charlie Kirk's assassination?
Oh lord. Give all the midwits a computer with access to the internet, they said. Everything will be fine, they said.
Robert Wilson said:Realitybites said:Mothra said:Realitybites said:Quote:
As for the paving question, you're assuming that because something looks unusual to you, it must indicate a cover-up. What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered? Suspicion isn't evidence. If there is proof that procedures were violated or evidence was destroyed, let's look at it. Otherwise, you're treating an unanswered question as proof of a conspiracy.
Because reality doesn't work like a TV show.
"For a murder, you're talking about a much more comprehensive and therefore much more time-consuming examination. For a start, everything in the scene is first photographed and videoed. And the scene would extend to all the possible exits, entrances, and routes between.
Then we get down to the details. Every footprint, partial footprint, trace of footprint, must be diagrammed, measured, photographed with scales. Every area of blood has to be assessed is it spatter? Drops? Smears? - measured, diagrammed, and photographed. Blood samples have to be taken from all areas and the exact position must be recorded, both in diagrams and photographs.
You've got several hours work there alone, and not just for one person either. Two CSI's at a minimum, three more likely, and a Crime Scene Manager deciding strategy and directing operations. So far, you haven't even begun on fingerprinting, or recovering items for lab work.
Most murder scenes will take several days to process properly. Quite apart from the work done by the CSI's, outside experts will often be called in. A Pathologist, to look at the body in situ before it's taken for a full post mortem. A Blood Pattern Analysis expert. A Ballistics expert if a gun was involved. If a gun has been left at the scene, that requires special treatment from a Firearms Officer. And so on."
Let me ask again. Maybe I'll get an answer this time.
What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered?
When there is a departure from normal procedure, it is up to the deviant to produce proof. The fact that this procedure normally takes days is proof enough. So, was the scene of the crime tested for explosive residue? Or was it hurriedly paved over to conceal any evidence of an alternative method of Charlie Kirk's assassination?
Oh lord. Give all the midwits a computer with access to the internet, they said. Everything will be fine, they said.
The extent of your rhetorical abilities is to unironically call other people far more intelligent than yourself stupid.
Go sit in the corner and continue to eat crayons and smell your own farts.
The_barBEARian said:Robert Wilson said:Realitybites said:Mothra said:Realitybites said:Quote:
As for the paving question, you're assuming that because something looks unusual to you, it must indicate a cover-up. What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered? Suspicion isn't evidence. If there is proof that procedures were violated or evidence was destroyed, let's look at it. Otherwise, you're treating an unanswered question as proof of a conspiracy.
Because reality doesn't work like a TV show.
"For a murder, you're talking about a much more comprehensive and therefore much more time-consuming examination. For a start, everything in the scene is first photographed and videoed. And the scene would extend to all the possible exits, entrances, and routes between.
Then we get down to the details. Every footprint, partial footprint, trace of footprint, must be diagrammed, measured, photographed with scales. Every area of blood has to be assessed is it spatter? Drops? Smears? - measured, diagrammed, and photographed. Blood samples have to be taken from all areas and the exact position must be recorded, both in diagrams and photographs.
You've got several hours work there alone, and not just for one person either. Two CSI's at a minimum, three more likely, and a Crime Scene Manager deciding strategy and directing operations. So far, you haven't even begun on fingerprinting, or recovering items for lab work.
Most murder scenes will take several days to process properly. Quite apart from the work done by the CSI's, outside experts will often be called in. A Pathologist, to look at the body in situ before it's taken for a full post mortem. A Blood Pattern Analysis expert. A Ballistics expert if a gun was involved. If a gun has been left at the scene, that requires special treatment from a Firearms Officer. And so on."
Let me ask again. Maybe I'll get an answer this time.
What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered?
When there is a departure from normal procedure, it is up to the deviant to produce proof. The fact that this procedure normally takes days is proof enough. So, was the scene of the crime tested for explosive residue? Or was it hurriedly paved over to conceal any evidence of an alternative method of Charlie Kirk's assassination?
Oh lord. Give all the midwits a computer with access to the internet, they said. Everything will be fine, they said.
The extent of your rhetorical abilities is to unironically call other people far more intelligent than yourself stupid.
Go sit in the corner and continue to eat crayons and smell your own farts.
You're right, bud. You and your Candance Owens truthers are the smart ones. Congrats.
The_barBEARian said:Robert Wilson said:Realitybites said:Mothra said:Realitybites said:Quote:
As for the paving question, you're assuming that because something looks unusual to you, it must indicate a cover-up. What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered? Suspicion isn't evidence. If there is proof that procedures were violated or evidence was destroyed, let's look at it. Otherwise, you're treating an unanswered question as proof of a conspiracy.
Because reality doesn't work like a TV show.
"For a murder, you're talking about a much more comprehensive and therefore much more time-consuming examination. For a start, everything in the scene is first photographed and videoed. And the scene would extend to all the possible exits, entrances, and routes between.
Then we get down to the details. Every footprint, partial footprint, trace of footprint, must be diagrammed, measured, photographed with scales. Every area of blood has to be assessed is it spatter? Drops? Smears? - measured, diagrammed, and photographed. Blood samples have to be taken from all areas and the exact position must be recorded, both in diagrams and photographs.
You've got several hours work there alone, and not just for one person either. Two CSI's at a minimum, three more likely, and a Crime Scene Manager deciding strategy and directing operations. So far, you haven't even begun on fingerprinting, or recovering items for lab work.
Most murder scenes will take several days to process properly. Quite apart from the work done by the CSI's, outside experts will often be called in. A Pathologist, to look at the body in situ before it's taken for a full post mortem. A Blood Pattern Analysis expert. A Ballistics expert if a gun was involved. If a gun has been left at the scene, that requires special treatment from a Firearms Officer. And so on."
Let me ask again. Maybe I'll get an answer this time.
What evidence do you have that investigators had not completed the relevant forensic work before the site was altered?
When there is a departure from normal procedure, it is up to the deviant to produce proof. The fact that this procedure normally takes days is proof enough. So, was the scene of the crime tested for explosive residue? Or was it hurriedly paved over to conceal any evidence of an alternative method of Charlie Kirk's assassination?
Oh lord. Give all the midwits a computer with access to the internet, they said. Everything will be fine, they said.
The extent of your rhetorical abilities is to unironically call other people far more intelligent than yourself stupid.
Go sit in the corner and continue to eat crayons and smell your own farts.
Anyone who listens to CO or believes her to be in any way a credible source needs to have his sanity questioned.
Listen to your boy, Nick.
🚨🇮🇹 BREAKING: Italian authorities just
— Jvnior (@Jvnior) July 13, 2026
seized 216 kilograms of drugs from an
Israeli arriving from Tel Aviv in Rome.
He is demanding to be deported to israel. pic.twitter.com/jinCyg5PJ9
Alex Karp’s a Lampshade
— Adolf Elmer (@adolfelmer) July 14, 2026
[FULL SONG] https://t.co/b0hjDlIHrq pic.twitter.com/PI5ADHKDfQ
Mothra said:The_barBEARian said:
The line-up for this conference already looks pretty fire. I though I'd post it here to let people know about it. This is the thread where all the patriots hang out anyway!Our first annual conference. November 12-14. Dallas Texas.
— New Christian Right (@nxrstudios) May 18, 2026
Register using the link below 👇 https://t.co/yc9PBWEBDQ
If Joel Webbon is there, you know you were going to get some very bad theology that drives people away from Christ.
His tiny congregation just north of Austin has done great damage to the kingdom.
Great podcast! I would love for you to tell us where the "bad theology" is here.
The_barBEARian said:Mothra said:The_barBEARian said:
The line-up for this conference already looks pretty fire. I though I'd post it here to let people know about it. This is the thread where all the patriots hang out anyway!Our first annual conference. November 12-14. Dallas Texas.
— New Christian Right (@nxrstudios) May 18, 2026
Register using the link below 👇 https://t.co/yc9PBWEBDQ
If Joel Webbon is there, you know you were going to get some very bad theology that drives people away from Christ.
His tiny congregation just north of Austin has done great damage to the kingdom.
Great podcast! I would love for you to tell us where the "bad theology" is here.
That's not the bumpkin, Joel Webbon, numnuts. That's another disgraced former pastor (JD Hall) with a pretty public fall from grace.
No reason to debunk his theology given you don't believe in it anyway.
More fantastic work from our greatest ally!
Randy Fine, who has positioned himself publicly as a staunch ally of President Trump, became the only GOP “NO” vote for the SAVE America Act for voter ID.
— AF Post (@AFpost) July 14, 2026
Follow: @AFpost pic.twitter.com/UNZsYl1ibX
He’s a wall kisser! pic.twitter.com/oKEI3uDF8B
— The Libertarian Joker (@JPetes420) July 14, 2026
Really remarkable clip from Vance on Rogan. Brings up Israeli efforts to derail his talks with Iran, suggests U.S. opinion makers are being paid at least indirectly by the Israeli government and says those people can “go to hell” https://t.co/GgHLTLe4ly
— Gram Slattery (@G_Slattery) July 15, 2026
Only one Republican voted to cut off foreign aid to Israel.
— Shadow of Ezra (@ShadowofEzra) July 15, 2026
His name is Thomas Massie. pic.twitter.com/e1wx2WMUCe
Voting to cut off all aid to Israel during a war with Iran is like cutting off aid to France during WW2.
We don't shut them off just because we have some differences.
We don't shut them off just because we have some differences.
Democrats have drawn a reprehensible line in the sand when it comes to Israel.
— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) July 16, 2026
“I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you” — Genesis 12:3
FOX: Democratic Pennsylvania senator John Fetterman threatening to desert his party if the party deserts Israel.
— Acyn (@Acyn) July 16, 2026
Fetterman: That’s my red line. pic.twitter.com/gXoaDGqCSw
Oldbear83 said:
Voting to cut off all aid to Israel during a war with Iran is like cutting off aid to France during WW2.
We don't shut them off just because we have some differences.
I could criticize any other country on earth and Boomers like you wouldnt say a word... but criticize Israel and you act like I insulted your wife... its not normal.
boognish_bear said:Democrats have drawn a reprehensible line in the sand when it comes to Israel.
— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) July 16, 2026
“I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you” — Genesis 12:3
Once again, that Bible verse is referring to Abraham, a Sumerian from Ur who worshipped God with Melchizidek a couple of thousand years before the first Jew walked the earth and the nation of Israel was founded. It is an unconditional covenant that has already been fulfilled with the spreading of the Semitic people all throughout the Middle East and has absolutely nothing to do with modern geopolitics.
Realitybites said:boognish_bear said:Democrats have drawn a reprehensible line in the sand when it comes to Israel.
— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) July 16, 2026
“I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you” — Genesis 12:3
Once again, that Bible verse is referring to Abraham, a Sumerian from Ur who worshipped God with Melchizidek a couple of thousand years before the first Jew walked the earth and the nation of Israel was founded. It is an unconditional covenant that has already been fulfilled with the spreading of the Semitic people all throughout the Middle East and has absolutely nothing to do with modern geopolitics.
If the covenant were fulfilled, then God would've said so. But he didn't. Romans nine through 11 is clear that the covenant is not yet fulfilled.
You antisemites have such terrible theology. It contradicts the plain language of scripture. There's no getting around Romans.
Most of Romans has to do with showing the Jews that the acts of the Law cannot save them apart from faith in Christ. Even the scriptures say that only a remnant of Israel will convert to Christianity. It has nothing to do with a future mass salvation of Israel the Nation State.
Covenant theology is the theology of Christianity and has been for nearly two millennia until Darby and Scofield showed up and peddled their nonsense.
Covenant theology is the theology of Christianity and has been for nearly two millennia until Darby and Scofield showed up and peddled their nonsense.
Realitybites said:
Most of Romans has to do with showing the Jews that the acts of the Law cannot save them apart from faith in Christ. Even the scriptures say that only a remnant of Israel will convert to Christianity. It has nothing to do with a future mass salvation of Israel the Nation State.
Covenant theology is the theology of Christianity and has been for nearly two millennia until Darby and Scofield showed up and peddled their nonsense.
This position just flatly contradicts the plain language of Paul's word. He says a remnant exists in the present time (Rom. 11:5), and then contrasts that with a future event: "a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved" (Rom. 11:25-26).
If Paul only meant the remnant, why distinguish between the remnant and "all Israel" in verses 25-26? The whole force of the chapter is that Israel's current unbelief is neither total nor final.
Romans 11 also says that the natural branches that were broken off "will be grafted in again" (v. 23) and that "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable" (v. 29). That is future restoration language, not merely a description of the remnant already being saved.
As for your position that covenant theology was the historic majority view for 2,000 years, that is just a completely absurd take. Christianity existed for 1,500 years before the invention of covenant theology in the Westminster Confession. So calling covenant theology the theology of Christianity is historically inaccurate from the outset. The early church was not teaching Westminster covenant theology, because Westminster covenant theology did not yet exist.
The_barBEARian said:Oldbear83 said:
Voting to cut off all aid to Israel during a war with Iran is like cutting off aid to France during WW2.
We don't shut them off just because we have some differences.
I could criticize any other country on earth and Boomers like you wouldnt say a word... but criticize Israel and you act like I insulted your wife... its not normal.
You make that false claim because you obsess on Israel. The problem here is that there is more than one dimension to Israel.
First, there is the Netanyahu problem. Mr. N is absolutely an opportunist who knows Trump believes America should support Israel, so of course N sees our huge military and tells himself we should be his attack dog for him. Absolutely agree Trump should listen a lot less to N and more to Vance about Israel's influence.
However, only a complete idiot or completely anti-American person would ignore the threat of Iran. The regime in Teheran doesn't just hate America, they were raised for two generations that way, and that means we have to address the dimensions of Iranian planning, from terrorism to Iran's long desire to be a regional hegemony. Part of that was the mistake of weakening Iraq, which took away a counterbalance to Iran, but Iran has also become more aggressive against other nations in the region, which to his credit Trump is addressing now. Saudi Arabia and Jordan have given tacit support to US actions, especially covert operations, but Israel is a vital part of any US effort to reduce Iranian ambitions.
It's trite to say Israel is the only democracy in the region, but still true enough. Trusting any Arab nation, or especially any Muslim theocracy, would lead to the US eventually funding actions which would harm Americans. Israel is not our best friend in the world, but is the nation least likely to harm us in the Middle East.
You need to look at history, geography, and the economy in broader scope.
Lara Trump says talk of cutting aid to Israel is "scary" because it's indicative of rising "anti-Semitism."
— Chris Menahan 🇺🇸 (@infolibnews) July 16, 2026
She suggests America is "not that far off" from Nazi Germany as Jewish New Yorkers are "terrified to walk down the street" with a Star of David necklace or yarmulke.… pic.twitter.com/nQFgoIexuF
Oldbear83 said:The_barBEARian said:Oldbear83 said:
Voting to cut off all aid to Israel during a war with Iran is like cutting off aid to France during WW2.
We don't shut them off just because we have some differences.
I could criticize any other country on earth and Boomers like you wouldnt say a word... but criticize Israel and you act like I insulted your wife... its not normal.
You make that false claim because you obsess on Israel. The problem here is that there is more than one dimension to Israel.
First, there is the Netanyahu problem. Mr. N is absolutely an opportunist who knows Trump believes America should support Israel, so of course N sees our huge military and tells himself we should be his attack dog for him. Absolutely agree Trump should listen a lot less to N and more to Vance about Israel's influence.
However, only a complete idiot or completely anti-American person would ignore the threat of Iran. The regime in Teheran doesn't just hate America, they were raised for two generations that way, and that means we have to address the dimensions of Iranian planning, from terrorism to Iran's long desire to be a regional hegemony. Part of that was the mistake of weakening Iraq, which took away a counterbalance to Iran, but Iran has also become more aggressive against other nations in the region, which to his credit Trump is addressing now. Saudi Arabia and Jordan have given tacit support to US actions, especially covert operations, but Israel is a vital part of any US effort to reduce Iranian ambitions.
It's trite to say Israel is the only democracy in the region, but still true enough. Trusting any Arab nation, or especially any Muslim theocracy, would lead to the US eventually funding actions which would harm Americans. Israel is not our best friend in the world, but is the nation least likely to harm us in the Middle East.
You need to look at history, geography, and the economy in broader scope.
Its more than a Netanyahu problem.
American Jews are more loyal to Israel than the United States.
Christian Zionist dispensationalists like historian and Mothra are more loyal to Israel than the United States because some guy who wrote the Scofield bible 100 years ago told them to be.
When you are dealing with ethnosupremacists or religious fanatics there is no room for compromise. For decades Jews and Christian Zionists bullied anyone who was remotely critical of the relationship between Israel and the US... going so far as even bullying the survivors of the U.S.S Liberty or the victims of Epstein's clients which is so odious and malicious that calling it evil would be an understatement.
Now you are seeing a backlash to the cry bully behavior and forced indoctrination I have experienced my entire life from Jews and Christian Zionists.
Whatever tangible geo-political advantage we receive from working with Israel is starkly undermined by the domestic strife and civil conflict that arises when people who dont slavishly accept that everything Israel does is right and they are always the "good guys" are viciously and mercilessly attacked and terrorized by Israel's supporters.
Oldbear83 said:The_barBEARian said:Oldbear83 said:
Voting to cut off all aid to Israel during a war with Iran is like cutting off aid to France during WW2.
We don't shut them off just because we have some differences.
I could criticize any other country on earth and Boomers like you wouldnt say a word... but criticize Israel and you act like I insulted your wife... its not normal.
You make that false claim because you obsess on Israel. The problem here is that there is more than one dimension to Israel.
First, there is the Netanyahu problem. Mr. N is absolutely an opportunist who knows Trump believes America should support Israel, so of course N sees our huge military and tells himself we should be his attack dog for him. Absolutely agree Trump should listen a lot less to N and more to Vance about Israel's influence.
However, only a complete idiot or completely anti-American person would ignore the threat of Iran. The regime in Teheran doesn't just hate America, they were raised for two generations that way, and that means we have to address the dimensions of Iranian planning, from terrorism to Iran's long desire to be a regional hegemony. Part of that was the mistake of weakening Iraq, which took away a counterbalance to Iran, but Iran has also become more aggressive against other nations in the region, which to his credit Trump is addressing now. Saudi Arabia and Jordan have given tacit support to US actions, especially covert operations, but Israel is a vital part of any US effort to reduce Iranian ambitions.
It's trite to say Israel is the only democracy in the region, but still true enough. Trusting any Arab nation, or especially any Muslim theocracy, would lead to the US eventually funding actions which would harm Americans. Israel is not our best friend in the world, but is the nation least likely to harm us in the Middle East.
You need to look at history, geography, and the economy in broader scope.
Also, have you ever actually been to Iran?
If not, how do you know any of what you wrote is true?
Extreme statements like:
Teheran doesn't just hate America, they were raised for two generations that way
Is it because you read it in newspapers or heard it on Fox News?
They were raised to hate Israel maybe... but why is that my problem?
I dont like Islam. I dont want Islam in America. But all of the terrorism on our home soil has been Sunni and not Shia and spread by Saudi Arabia and not Iran.
I have never met you in person yet I'd not be surprised to see you pop a vein when you see someone in a yarmulke.
Oldbear83 said:
I have never met you in person yet I'd not be surprised to see you pop a vein when you see someone in a yarmulke.
Probably... after they spit all over me for wearing a cross around my neck.
The_barBEARian said:Oldbear83 said:
I have never met you in person yet I'd not be surprised to see you pop a vein when you see someone in a yarmulke.
Probably... after they spit all over me for wearing a cross around my neck.
Funny, no one I meet ever spits on me. Maybe it's something you are saying/doing?
Oldbear83 said:The_barBEARian said:Oldbear83 said:
I have never met you in person yet I'd not be surprised to see you pop a vein when you see someone in a yarmulke.
Probably... after they spit all over me for wearing a cross around my neck.
Funny, no one I meet ever spits on me. Maybe it's something you are saying/doing?
You trying to hit on married Jews or something?
It’s Chiiiiina!! 🇨🇳😅 pic.twitter.com/7DyjTcJN32
— James Li (@5149jamesli) July 18, 2026
Oldbear83 said:
Voting to cut off all aid to Israel during a war with Iran is like cutting off aid to France during WW2.
We don't shut them off just because we have some differences.