Space Merchant

4 Victims. The one I am familiar with, of whom I visited his family was Tate Myre, who was shot by the mentally depraved Ethan Crumbley, of whom his parents didn't see any red flags for. Tate was only 16. Granted with my backing, us islanders who adhere to Scripture, death does not bother us, even me, at all, and of course there is no doubt it does not for you either, granted of how you JWs see death. But what does bother me is the effect of a death upon one's household, mainly those who cannot handle it and does not see the reality of the situation. The people who knew the family visited, friends of the family, and I know him due to someone in the community, the reason I went to visit to pay my respects. This was before Kentucky and Washington. Although I show the faces of those who commit crimes, but killers, I do not show, for some people, even the media weaponize it, likewise the pictures of those I know who are deceased, therefore, you are free to look into the story itself, as of now it is still ongoing. Now Kentucky is picking itself up, some people go there still for reasons, as is to help, which is a normal thing for weather disasters, Washington though was due to Robert Malone and the others in the community who wanted me to come.

I am somewhat of a hated person because of being focused on facts and the Bible. But yes, this one is a reason one. She is affiliated with Alex Jones and Info Wars, a hellbent Trump Supporter, who as recently disbanded from the Trump parade via burning of her hat and Trump support items. Do not be fooled by the media, not all of them are that crazy, only a fringe. I engaged with this person only twice, this was during the time Info Wars are all over the place. I do not side with the paradigm, therefore, politics is foolish theater, however, the only thing I agree with her on is outside of politics, and it is regarding today's society, of which many are against the normalization of pedophilia as is the shift of the culture war. Truthers refer to her as Ashton, and I only had recently seen her in a debate clips concerning pedophilia, as in regards to the image below, I have a lot of rivals, opponents, etc, this is the result when you go on real life debates, and various situations that make you run into such people directly and indirectly. That being said, as for you other notations. The events of 2017 was somewhat scrubbed by EXJW, namely the one you mentioned above He is a Paganism, and somewhat mentally unstable. He attempted mimic Truthers himself, but Truthers seem him as a wannabe and or irrelevant, and The Anonymous group were not too happy with one of his videos, especially one from the Community who is based out of Moscow, who was very angry with EXJW praising Putin for the banning of your faith, which is part of the events taking place today. The videos he scrubbed, even that of his Wiccan ceremony, were removed and or hidden. You cannot get them from an Archive even though there are links. As for John Cedars, even JW Crisis, everything pertaining to him and his friend, Peter Jeuck (Former Bible Student) is scrubbed. If you want to know the name of of his friend, it is That being said, as stated, the information on this event is like that of a dead carcass after the wild beasts were done with it, therefore, very little remains. If it makes you feel anywhere to find out the Schism of EXJWs, you are free to look here, granted the focus of attack was not on JWs, per-say, but among other EXJWs - https://m.facebook.com/nt/screen/?params={"note_id"%3A757461374812405}&path=%2Fnotes%2Fnote%2F&refsrc=deprecated&_rdr Also note that: Peter had something very vital to say about the whole child sex abuse issue, however, like the 1975 video I mentioned, EXJW ran it and burned this information to the ground with shaming, and death threats after the failed lie regarding the park situation. Moreover, he provided a solution that would benefit everyone, even current JWs because it made sense. Those who heard from both videos disassociated themselves from the EXJW community, and onlookers were reinforced to deem those who took action on that day as a legitimate threat to the County. Anyways, those videos are lost Gems, even with IT expertise, and the power of the internet and use of public domain archives, they're impossible to find unless someone downloaded them prior before the EXJW essentially destroyed it. As for the situation with JW Crisis (Gonzalez) the boyfriend issue, he wanted to rough up JW Crisis, the video of that, as is the boyfriend, also were scrubbed. Although The EXJWs were the aggressor, they tried to convince the community that the female JW student sent the boyfriend after them despite they were the ones who raided the JW church, the one in Ringwood, if I recall, the one you may have been a part of since you stated this in the past. Jehovah's Witnesses, although imperfect, the low hanging fruit of which drops from it's tree can taint and confuse people, which seems to be the case in the other thread, as is the followers of Cedars, who committed infidelity against his wife, and Pearl Doxsey alongside her Acolytes. The Wild Beast made a move, so do not be surprised of an unexpected attack in the New Normal, into the Reset.

As of recent, there might be other folks coming to the doors of people that are not Mormon or JWs. As stated a few days ago, the Wild Beast made a subtle move, just be vigilant. It may even hinder you JWs also.

@Equivocation That is essentially it. The debate ended on page 10. The case is closed, what transpired later is simply an infectious disease that has no host. That being said, in regards to Example 1, it was already confirmed, even with Reslight. Glad you pointed out that comments made by the EXJW, the same comments ignored by the taint and the sinner.

Totally irrelevant. You are not part of the UN but you speak as if you know it, not one stated otherwise... You do have to be a JW to know the events of Tulsa and the Holocaust. Unless, you want to tell us why the camps were specifically made for JWs, then be my guest. Both of you were wrong since page 10 so I do not see why you are continuing when you protected a false witness. That being said, the fact you adhered to the verse in question from the last thread paints you as a taint. You should be using your time to cleanse thyself.

Yeah just do not watch the video at all, granted it is already a misleading bias piece. There were points made via bias opinion concerning several examples about race, archives, the Holocaust, etc, and in the video itself all points were incorrect as an attempt to mislead. An example is in regards to the EXJW stating Hitler started first and built the camps for JWS only and went after the Jews later. That makes no sense, and I can see why people got banned from the YouTube channel. That being said, always do the research for anything and everything for the facts. What you see here is both @Srecko Sostar and @Witness once again, defending something false. As I told them, no one is asking them to agree with Jehovah's Witnesses, but they were asked to use critical thinking to do the research to not get duped by the falsehood, yet they hold an agenda to defend the video to the point they contradicted themselves effectively putting them in err; the refutation ended on pages 10 and 11, but it seems at this point, @Witness and @Srecko Sostar is beating a dead horse. Regarding the issue about Racial Tension, @JW Insider and I mentioned it before. The reason JWs are pinned to the events of 1921 was due to the fact Pastor Rutherford at the time was either about to give a sermon/talk or it took place already, but the events of Sarah Page pretty much caused a lot of blood and death in Tulsa, which indirectly effected Bible Students in that part of the United States. That said our countries are no different, the US has it's Racial issues at the time, and I am sure the UK did also, as with others.

This has nothing to do with prejudices. This has everything to do with someone, claiming a false witness as a truth. No one is going to believe that Bible Students were racist, as is, no one is going to believe that somehow Jehovah's Witnesses is what caused Hitler to go down the path that was on prior to the concentration camps, nor will anyone believe that the camps were specifically made for JWs and them alone, as the video attests to. The Archive publication does NOT even give that idea as this EXJW claims. No one is going to believe Archives are 100% hidden. Therefore all things of which you and @Witness proclaimed is a defense against a false witness. Even down the road, you defeated yourself with the article on Tulsa whereas the video stated otherwise, likewise for Witness who posted an Archived link. The former EXJW did indeed lie, and the fact that the people who called him out and was technically banned from the YouTube channel also shows. The both of you have no case here.

Your opinions are unverified. You are free to speak your peace when it comes to opinions, however, opinions that are deemed bias can mislead, something of which you and @Witness need to learn, remember, not wise to play cards at the table of demons just because. The note of the Archives was merely opinion based, nothing more, therefore, it isn't a big secret granted the level of public domains and infrastructure have the Archives. Just because the WT has something those in the IT field call it, K.O.C. to some level, does not deem this to be a hidden database, more so, as mentioned, how available these archives have prior to the jump from CD/DVD to App/Website. It is also noted that JW.org was originally Watchtower.com to a degree, and granted it mirrored the CD/DVDs, prior to the Archives, the publications could be found there. No one is pretending to be smart. You do not need to be smart to read a History Book about Racial Tension or the Holocaust. That being said, if you can read a publication of your former faith from JW.org, you can read an elementary level/Entry-Level History Book about said events. Moreover, these are noted facts, nothing more. Facts are can't be refuted when it is used to dismantle falsehood.

It only gets worse from here, it was said that there was a disabled woman who got hurt when the Green suits came in. After that event, this didn't deter the Truckers or their supporters, because of this Trudeau is using other tactics. On the other side of the battlefield, there are crazy affiliates with some ties to the government who are running around, one in question who is a legitimate enemy to not just those involved, but even to us Truthers. That being said, the guy in the video is similar to some folks I ran into in the past, but never have I seen one until now in a situation that is this big. The crazy thing is that this unhinged person does not get removed off the platforms due to his claims, yet others who do not think of the Convoy as a problem, get removed. It is one of the very reasons I detest the Agenda narrative with these paradigms. To add more fuel to the fire, this man has followers who are influenced by him and support his actions. An example of an extremely mentally depraved soul, those who seek to be championed as being on the right side of history with their misleading narratives and action.

Yet going back to pages 1, 2, and 3, we see you agreeing via reaction with Witness. We see your first remark about Archives, and pages later, we see you interjecting with narratives in order to put up a defense on the video with your assertions. These were proven even previously on the fact you were exposed due to a zeroing question. I don't think much, it is basic examining. Nothing insane, even if someone just Socrates'd himself . I do not use misconceptions; never such for misconceptions are opinion based, I am, and always have been against misconceptions of which is what this video is addressing in which was refuted. You can think about collecting points, for doing so is a waste of time. I always do call backs to whole quotes and reactions. I just pointed it out, but the fact you mention the react with that remark, is evidence to claim; you deliberate answered it yourself. Again, I let things trail on purpose, and the end result is as predicted. Definition for Upvote - (in an online context) register approval of or agreement with (a post or poster) by means of a particular icon. (in an online context) an instance of using a particular icon to register approval of or agreement with a post or poster; show of support. Secondary Definition - to cast a vote in support of (an online comment, article, etc.) by clicking on an arrow or other icon, usually affecting the post's rank or position on a website. noun such a favorable vote Example: Even when the information is wrong, both you and Witness still show a sign of support with each other. If you want to fight a legitimate notation deem as a fact from a Dictionary related to online forums - then be my guest. Then again, you might not because in the past you favored definitions, only when it is used to others and not you, until now. That being said, let this be a lesson for both you and Witness. Do your own research, do not blindly accept whatever a video says. This is also a call back to what the Bible says to a similar effect.

When the claim of the video was being misleading, you defended all the way through in which she stated to be a factual video. Your first contribution was in relation to the Archives, and later on the other examples. You were shown to have reacted in agreeance with Witness, and she did the same for you, likewise with the one known as @Kick_Faceinator. That is why it was also brought up, you and them didn't know what the video contains only after the notation were brought up for a refutation, you were even called a YES MAN, and it was for a reason, not the first time you were called that either. This among the very reason I held back at first to bring up all points, just to see what you, Witness or Kick will say, for this was on purpose. Like I said, an experienced debater. Even on the bible side of things, discernment was used to Examine the video in question vs the response. And from there, I was able to see the video was misleading via bias opinion, and the fact I am able to trek the video's history, opposing comments to the video, I was able to see that some comments were purposely blocked/removed via marked as spam to prevent people from seeing the truth, i.e. comments related to example 2 specifically. The fact you were backed into a corner with facts from page 8, already knowing that any response that came forward it automatically indefensible on your part, and Witness'; allowing it to trail out, which also caused the notation of one not being able to critical think. In short, Iceberg-sque before taking action, resulting in putting you in a position to being unable to refute facts, likewise with Witness.

He isn't a mod, he is a YouTuber he said it, word for word, that the Bible Students were Racist. That is why I brought up the notation of the Segregation Era. @Witness said everything was factual concerning the video, but the deception was refuted. You even linked a publication from the JW website, and there was no evidence of racial tension in the events of that Era and Tulsa between the Bible Students. But even then, you defend throughout the debate the lie in the video, which does not make sense, this is why the deduction tactic was used; a tool in a debater's bag, to expose. Then why did both you and @Witness agree with the video of which the EX JW Bethel member said that they were Racist? This is what the focus was for the first example he gave. He also tried to paint modern views with events of the 1900s which makes absolutely no sense. See, that is an opinion, you are learning. However, opinions are unverified, Facts can be verified. The Bible Students, and most of Christian were against Racisms at the time, for even outside of the bible Students, there are other events that took place prior to and after Black Wall Street, leading up to the events of 1964. Likewise with those who adhere to Fundamentalism. Granted the effect Pastor Russell had on the Bible Students, they were not practitioners of Racism at all and were more so subjection to the dark aspects of Jim Crow Laws. An example would be, if you were black in those days, and @Witness was white. She would defend you by any means necessary without being violent. Despite this, those who adhere to Jim Crow Laws are the types to target you. She would visit you and or help you by any means. Let's say both of you were in Tulsa, she'd be the one to warn you to leave prior to when the killing starts. She and her household are of your unity, one family, one unit who look out for each other, be it of blood relative and or neighbor Even in reverse if @Witness was black, she'd do the same for you. It is no different from what took place with the Bible Students. And no, there is no bordered version of Racism, you are either for it or against it in those days, even if it means standing that the doorstep of death. Believe it or not, some people would die to protect their fellow man or their views, be the risk. The one parallel to this situation is the events in Rwanda much later from the events of Tulsa. That is only if you take things out of context to deem them Racist. There is a why as this is so prior to the 1964 Act. More so, you've already shown legitimacy of the unity they had in those days. That being said, this is why it is not a good idea to mix today's modern think with the old, it causes problems like this, and it negates to the view this EXJW provided in his opinion. As in what exactly? Elaborate. The Era and Tulsa are as clear as day, one cannot refute them with opinions. There is a difference in incorporation vs being the founder of something.

Actually it is, in the debater space, this is what it denotes to, it is an evasive tactic to dodge a question, mainly a question that is zeroed in for a direct response. The fact you did that was in regards to save safe. This is what @Cos, but his way of doing it was more twisted to the point of getting information of Bishops and Church Fathers and using it as an attack mechanism in a debate. What killed it for him was the original written works vs what those of Catholicism profess/revised. You might get that with a novice debater, but not an experienced one. And to note, both you and Witness were in that debate, not realizing your remarks were being shot down by a twisted Trinitarian narrative. It should be noted, Trinitarians see EXJW as a weapon, therefore, several, with Cos being the big shot in that debate with his lies, weaponized you and Witness for his Agenda for Church Fathers.

Ok. He was head of Zion's Watch Tower Tract Society, not the Bible Student (The Movement itself). It should also be noted that the Society was incorporated with Pastor Russell, who led the Movement in question. For an EX-Jehovah's Witness, how is this unknown to you? Pastor Russell led the Bible Students. He was an was an American Christian Restorationist minister out of Pittsburgh who founded what is known as the Bible Student Movement. Strike 2 for ignorance on your part. Pastor Rutherford then took over for the late Pastor Russell. Not only he led the Bible Students, but had a role in some changes, especially the name in question, the name being Jehovah's Witnesses. Surely you can do better than that, what makes this more sad is in the other pages, you pretended to not know who the second leader of the Bible Student was in order to protect the notations of the video as is support @Witness. The Hypocrisy stems even further from your past statements that align with Example 3, this is why anyone can say you are contradicting yourself when your own words were lined, and alluded to against you of which you claim denial. A very bad look. Now that you put yourself in this position, where did you get the notation that Conley lead the Bible Students when CTR was the founder? Alliance World Fellowship (The CMA) and Bible Students are 2 different things.

Bible Student - Reslight. He is still one despite his age. In regards to race, he took issue with whatever it was your shining star, Cedars, presented. For your sake, and @Witness' sake, Race issues, Slavery, Segregation, and all pertaining to it is not wise on your part to speak of things of which you know little of, granted, you referred to the latter as a Doctrine when it is not. If you actually had the basics of such category, you would not be defending someone who attest to the past with modern notations. As is, his example on the Holocaust using a 1930s Awake, easily refuted with facts. This should also bring forth perhaps a club for History itself for the lacking, such as yourself. That being said Archives: refuted because of an Intranet, be it in or out of a public domain. Example 1: provied to be false because no Bible Student had been racist in the specific Era prior to becoming JWs. Example 2: Refuted easily because of Antisemitism pushed Hitler and his minions to go after the Jews, the JWs came a bit later than that and they were never the first target, as the EXJW claims when atempting to use a 1930s Awake article. Example 3: 1925... Nuff said for there is also ample information on this forum. NOTE: The fact this EXJW is lacking in the Network field also shows this even to be more jarring. Therefore the accusation of falsehood is true concerning the video. The accusation of those defending falsehood is also true. The accusation of the lack of critical thinking, also true. The grave both you and Witness is digging, so to speak, is a rather deep one, perhaps far deeper than what Cos did a while back on here where he tried to change 4th century history. Not a good look.

Yet no evidence of the group being Racist, even Bible Students who know the history attest to the same thing. What is a lie is the notation of Racist, and that has been refuted by means of your video. This stems beyond the GB, but then again, you do not know the second leader of your faith which contradicts your assertions. Yet with a legitimate 1930 publication, you cannot attest to the latter, therefore, you bear a false witness. No it isn't. It is more inline with riddles. As a debater over the years whenever someone does this, it 100% deems one thing - being uncomfortable with the question in of itself. You didn't answer it because you did not want to devalue the video's first example, nothing more, therefore, fleeing from Facts. Although most JWs cannot debate, former JWs are not the best at it, many examples, as is the existence of SocoFilms. To make it simpler for you, was the EXJW correct when he said Bible Students were Racists? The fact that I quoted him directly, word for word in which both you and @Witness is ignoring shows the Agenda of justifiable Cause to preach a false narrative. This also proves some EXJW are not as sound in regards to history about race issues. The same reason why even Reslight, who does not agree with JWs, to attack similar notations of yours.

You were given the question, to answer a question with a question is a show of avoiding your own conveyed response. Again - Can you give one example of Racism committed by the Bible Students against blacks between the years 1920-1930? Not too long ago you equated the past with present day notations to defend the video. You are also purposely AVOIDING the quote from the EXJW - both you and @Witness deem the video as factual but choose to ignore what he said from that transcript. Interesting. That being said, the history of the events of 1921 is clear as with the Era, even in the eyes of those who adhere to Fundamentalism, likewise to Christendom in that Era, namely the events of the Great Awakening which is 100% Christian based. This is not the first time I talked about the Great Awakening...

We already talked about Archives, therefore, you have no case. What you are showing me is a INTRANET outside of the domain, an INFUSTRAURE used by JWs on a public form. As someone who deals in the Network field, you have no case in that regard.

@Srecko Sostar The fact that you want to be so bold in this indefensible position to defend misleading information as @Witness did. Can you give one example of Racism committed by the Bible Students against blacks between the years 1920-1930? The transcript from the EXJW Word for word is highlighted in green. OF which he equated the past with president notations. ExJW from the video - [Example 1... egregated congregations you had coloured congregations and white congregations where does that sound familiar? That is racism] You defend the video so much, but can you defend his words? The fact I zero you with this one is due to what you said in order to defend someone tainted. This way everyone, from JWs, EXJWs, and other onlookers can see your lack knowledge of said history on full display vs the facts. It is already revealed you accept misleading information, but this time via zeroing people can see it for themselves. For the onlookers/guests, this is already quite a sight since this is Black History Month for them, so much so to see someone who is a former JW not being aware of facts pertaining to history, and what else than an important marker in time - Tulsa. Spotlight is on you, Srecko.

The video pointed out in regards to Example 1, Bible Students were deemed Racist, the same video that @Witness said was factual. Not only you are trying to save face yet again, you are attempting to use a flail argument in the process. What you say here is contradicting your last few statements, as is, the recent one, which disqualifies the claim proving the video to be false on account to Example 1. You may want to pay attention to what she said before and after the Facts were presented, going as far as to claim this was a JW issue only - evidence pages 3, 4 and 5 in which Witness is seen heavily defending the video and using ill remarks in the process. The video did speak on the issue of Racism in Example 1, the EXJW was quoted with a Transcript - word for word. This is anything new. The Watchtower is on a domain that is Intranet based. This goes for all institutions. Why continue to beat a dead horse when you can easily be refuted again here? Anyways, the refutations is on the early pages. He attested that this was unknown information, which it is not. He could also. Let's note that. If that was the case, why did he like about the 1930 article which was archived to push the notation of Racism as is the events of Germany? So can you give evidence that Bible Students in the 1921 were Racist? Remember, this was the Segregation Era whereas most religious folks, even bible Students were not fans of Jim Crow. You seem to be confusing the past with present day, stay on focus. It is noted that JWs abhor Racism, ironically this was what the EXJW said, but not of Bible Students of which he claims they were Racist. We're not talking about today, again you are equating the past and the present. Extremely 2 different notations. That being said, how are you so sure? Because nearly every response in other threads puts you in a contradiction. So can you show evidence of the Jehovah's Witnesses of today supported Jim Crow? Silly assertion - as always and usual when you can't defend what you attest as a truth. There is no denial, there is facts. No one is going to believe you and @Witness regarding the events mentioned for Example 1 and 2, even 3 of which this EXJW attested to with his own opinion. Continue to make yourself look as you do now, you are only presenting a case of the mental state of the common EXJW who lacks not only knowing their former faith, but History pertaining to the US and the EU. Again, both of you are in a position that is an indefensible one the second you made claim to the video being Factual, even in Witness' case which she attested to this several times, therefore, you are sinking on her ship, so to speak.

Not once on this thread I expressed my opinion regarding Tulsa, the events of 1921 and or the 1964. Do not add to my words with accusations, thank you. Also you defeated the purpose of the verse you support regarding a true witness and a false witness with that remark. Remember, Facts and Opinions are two different things. They're not the same; it's akin to bias vs unbiased also. This is the reason why the video's bias opinion is challenged, as are those who defend it. The facts are legitimate evidence, this was already pointed out, regarding the events of the Segregation Era which includes Tulsa to refute the EXJW video is highlighted. There is a reason why I stated facts are everything, likewise with evidence.

You may want to read those articles fully because it is already known to have been taken out of context, something of which was mentioned a long time ago on this forum, even that of the Masonic Hall. Moreover, this was attested, already on this thread concerning back in those days. In regards to Example 1, everything you said does not prove anything to what the video attest to the events of 1900s in which he deem the Bible Student Racist. This treads beyond the Watchtower itself in relation to the History of Racism and Segregation in the United States, more so the very existence of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Nice try, but no cigar. No one knows, that is why it is absurd to take a guess of which you did. In regards to Atheistism, it was somewhat uncanny even in those days since some lean towards Fundamentalism, hence the view of those who adhere strongly to Jim Crow Laws against people of color, Black folks vs Blacks view of Whites; essentially those who are at odds with each other during Racial Tension, compared to those who do not abide by such things outside of Christendom, etc. Remember, The Great Awakening was the reason many Christian faiths waved over the United States, this is where the Restorationist came from, evidently, Pastor Russell himself. But the irony of it all, the fact you were motioned to cite that article you 100% proved the ExJW from Bethel to be a lair (with Witness agreeing in reaction), reasons why, I thank you, which is rare. That is what happens when your Agenda cannot match up to historical events. Likewise with the EXJW, who knows very little, as you and Witness do. Hypothetically speaking, as pointed out if Bible Students were indeed racist, they would not be making decisions in that regard to a Black Man to help, and instead, would led everything run red and burn, as did the people in Tulsa when they dealt with Black Families, perhaps give the Black Brother to the Ku Klux Klan (The KKK) who would most likely lynch or burn him on a cross, in addition, as they attempted to do at the Court House, demanding death for a man, Dick Rowland, who was accused of raping a 17 year old white girl named Sarah Page. Likewise, a high possibly that Jehovah's Witnesses would never exist, Rutherford would have never became a Bible Student, and most likely would still be studying/practicing law and or end up as some victimized by the Jim Crow folks or jailed. Going into Example 2, the events of the Holocaust involving them would be non-existent, and the Gobitis Family, who were Jehovah's Witnesses (in this case, not) would not only pledge to Nationalism, but they adhere to the Bellamy salute. A small change can do a lot, like a butterfly effect. Likewise with Tulsa, those few days, if the situation was different for Dick and Sarah, the events would span even longer throughout the Southern areas of the United States. Then again this was hypothetical talk - The events of which was mention are merely scenarios, nothing more. As stated before, either you or Witness can't really do much to refute the facts, even your own assumptions, of which you attested to willfully, also shot down.

@JW Insider @Mic Drop One of our own from the Community is there, he's both a Truther and an Independent Journalist who resides in Canada. As of recent news, the police has started to move in on the Convoy, and by early March the mentioned Convoy stated to start in the United States will be coming, their focus is Washington. Authoritarianism, although some of it's seeds have been here, is evidently coming to the doorstep of the US but this time by means of how the gov't reacts to a protest, to make matters far more dangerous, is due to the divide in the US as of right now of those in the political paradigm. Neutral or not, of an institutions or not, it is going to effect everyone, even the children who comes after us. That said, one needs to be very vigilant going forward and to not bs distracted. The video below is the reason why people now dub Justin Trudeau as a Dictator:

Indeed, none of us were, however in regards to the events of Black Wall Street, not everyone was under the influence of the Jim Crow Laws, evident leading up to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As for the other remark it is unlikely action or not, violence found it's way into some people's homes resulting in anyone in that area during that time to flee, if white, dangerous punishment, if black, regardless of sex/age, it will be far worse for them. It is absurd that there are those out there who would attest to re-writing segments in history just to fit their Agenda, and those of it are the obvious ones, the former EXJW in the video just simply outright deem the Bible Students racist without knowing as to why there was segregation institutions, likewise in regards to the events of Germany. The irony of all this, Witness, Pearl's acolyte, does not realize that this YouTuber has blocked anyone be it by him or those abusing the system from calling out the misleading information, which is a similar case to the events of 11/5/17, let alone what was in the video prior to the claim of misleading. Even here, misinformation has tainted the latter so much so she isn't unable to critical think or discern if the YouTuber was of deception or not. The very reason I refer this to Glasgow because a similar thing was done, as is a recent case regarding a Leftist. That being said, everyone should be able to understand history of these events, accurately because eventually, enemies will use their Agenda to change things; the onlookers are aware of this. This is a situation I, and others in the community of which I am from, dealing with/fight against with known information to refute Marxism; censorship being the biggest issue with us now. Other than that, all the examples addressed in that video was refuted, even the one pertaining to Archives, etc. The reason the latter continues is due to saving face, nothing more, making the video's claim vs the likes of Tulsa irrefutable, as with examples 2 and 3.

Citations of the sources, merely. If you are aware from the last thread, I rely on evidence, qutations, citations, etc, even call backs - this is literally the norm in relation to all my reponses, as is with alluding to Scripture. The thing is with us outside of the paradigm is we rely on evidence and information, reasons being to prevent the Agenda/Propaganda driven folk from taking over, to shift things, an example of this is in regards to things today, likewise with Mainstream Christendom, who adopted that mentality. That being said, in short, facts are everything, and I noted JWI because both of us, even the Ahtiest, allued to the events of Tulsa invovling the Bible Students, as is, the events of the court house, espically in regards to the accusation of the 17 year old girl. Other than that, the white nieghbor, there is no evidence of him being Christian, be it ture or not, for even back then, there is no dobut the Christians outside of root would adopt Jim Crow Laws, in addition to willfull sregregation, of which the YouTuber allueded to. If anything, the biggest part of Tulsa was regarding the court house, of which Rutherford's picture can be seen.