02
Feb
17

Trump-loving!


Yet more Trump-loving propaganda from Bill Randles

And the recommendation of a video titled: “Trump saves civilisation”

https://billrandles.wordpress.com/2017/01/30/it-is-amazing-what-you-can-do-when-you-are-not-owned-by-the-saudis/

Sorry Bill I reject that saviour, the one emblazoned across your blog on the video you recommend.

There is only ONE saviour. His name is JESUS.
Randles starts his post by saying:

“Within one week into his presidency it looks like Donald Trump has brought us to a possibly sane solution, which may be on the way to solve the utterly destructive “Muslim Refugee Crisis”, humanly speaking, of course.”

Sane solution? To a problem greatly caused (or at least exacerbated) by incompetent US military ventures in the middle east?

Sadly Randles is not trying to be ironic.

Is American evangelicalism so weak that it can’t cope with an influx of foreign refugees ripe for the gospel? Perhaps the truth is, American evangelicalism has NO gospel to preach to them,  considering the saviour they now look to is a lying, self-confessed* sexual abuser of women, a businessman turned president. (* A confession later reacted and labelled as “locker room” talk).

Read Randles’ article and weep – that American evangelicals and once respected teachers have fallen so far.

The “Trump Saves Civilisation” video that Randles recommends is by Stefan Molyneaux who on the link below  is described as “an atheist anarcho-capitalist” who  “tries to tell you that your parents are liars and bullies if they believe in government or religion”

 http://www.fdrliberated.com/brief-introduction-freedomain-radio/

Advertisements

40 Responses to “Trump-loving!”


  1. 1 Jeanne T.
    February 2, 2017 at 11:37 am

    Were you a cult leader, Tim?

  2. February 2, 2017 at 11:46 am

    No.
    Never.

    A cult leader needs to have (and exploit) followers.

    I was deceived by false teachers in the past and will now do what I can to help others to avoid the same kind of thing.

    I have now lost any doubt that Bill Randles has become a false teacher who has undermined his once valuable ministry by adopting Trumpism – and recommending CLEARLY problematical videos to justify his adopted position.

  3. 3 Jeanne T.
    February 2, 2017 at 12:10 pm

    When did you start reading Pastor Randles’ blogs? Have you viewed his videos? If so, when did you first do so? Who introduced you to Pastor Randles’ ministry? When?

    Besides the recent political articles and the two videos you take issue with (i.e., before October 2016), can you provide links to his articles/videos (non-political) which you find to be false? Because it appears to me that you only started commenting at his blog in October 2016. Of course, I could be wrong, but I don’t have the time to peruse through his entire blog to see when began posting there. Has Pastor Randles ever denied essential Christian doctrine?

  4. February 2, 2017 at 12:25 pm

    I don’t recall when I first started reading his blog, but I was listening to his sermons and reading his books more than 10 years ago.

    Sorry, but you CAN’T separate his political posts from any so-called non-political post.

    What are we to make of a “teacher” who recommends lying videos (the anti-Clinton rant from a couple of months ago) and promotes a video that calls Trump the saviour of civilisation, presented by “an atheist anarcho-capitalist” who “tries to tell you that your parents are liars and bullies if they believe in government or religion”?

    Is THAT the kind of teacher to be trusted?

  5. 5 Jeanne T.
    February 2, 2017 at 12:32 pm

    Thanks for finally confirming my suspicions that you do not consider Pastor Randles to be saved. I asked you that question once before, but you refused to give me a straight answer.

  6. February 2, 2017 at 12:44 pm

    Where did I say anything about his salvation?

    I make no judgement on anyone’s salvation – that will only be determined by the Lord Himself according to whether someone has believed, and CONTINUED believing in Him until the end.

    Wilfully continuing to promote falsehoods doesn’t help anyone to persevere in belief until the end. Neither does it help those who trust in what they are promoting.

  7. 7 Jeanne T.
    February 2, 2017 at 12:47 pm

    Has Pastor Randles denied any essential Christian doctrine? You have again refused to answer my question, Tim.

  8. February 2, 2017 at 12:49 pm

    Has Pastor Randles denied any essential Christian doctrine?

    Irrelevant.

    He HAS promoted falsehood.
    And it’s your choice if you want to accept and justify what he’s done and continues to do. But you won’t be doing so in ignorance.

  9. 9 Jeanne T.
    February 2, 2017 at 1:06 pm

    Unless Pastor Randles has denied Jesus, Christian doctrine, and the truth of the Bible in his teachings, he is not a “false teacher”.

  10. February 2, 2017 at 1:12 pm

    It isn’t what is NOT done that matters.

    It’s what IS done.

    Promoting falsehood = false teaching.

  11. February 2, 2017 at 1:14 pm

    Randles recommends a video by Stefan Molyneux entitled “Trump Saves Civilisation”.

    An article about the effects of Stefan Molyneaux’s message:

    https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2008/nov/15/family-relationships-fdr-defoo-cult

  12. February 2, 2017 at 1:22 pm

    Unless Pastor Randles has denied Jesus, Christian doctrine, and the truth of the Bible in his teachings, he is not a “false teacher”.

    I think you find that Kenneth Copeland and other WOF teachers would not deny “Jesus, Christian doctrine, and the truth of the Bible” in their teachings. It’s what they ADD that makes them false teachers.

  13. 13 Jeanne T.
    February 2, 2017 at 2:10 pm

    “I think you find that Kenneth Copeland and other WOF teachers would not deny “Jesus, Christian doctrine, and the truth of the Bible” in their teachings.”

    Then why is it a cult? Is Pastor Randles a cult leader as well?

  14. February 2, 2017 at 2:15 pm

    Have I called WOF a cult?

    It’s a false teaching because they teach false things.

    As long as Bill Randles promotes falsehood and uses lying misleading sites created by deceivers to back his point of view, then he is no less a false teacher than Copeland and co.

    Excusing that kind of thing does him and his followers no favours.

  15. 15 Marleen
    February 2, 2017 at 2:17 pm

    I haven’t read the comments yet. I was struck, so to speak, by the link title above: “not owned by the Saudis.” Really? Is not being owned by the Saudis the reason Saudi Arabia WASN’T on “the list” Jan. 27th?

  16. February 2, 2017 at 2:38 pm

    Saudi Arabia, the source of those who committed the worst Terrorist attacks on America are significantly absent from “the list”, as are other rich Muslim nations in which Trump has business interests.
    Significantly present on “the list” are those poor Muslim nations that themselves have suffered more from terrorism and military destruction (the very things that have caused the refugee crisis) than America has ever suffered. Not one of those nations has been the source of a terrorist act on American soil.

    I would have thought that Christian Americans would welcome the chance to embrace those fleeing to the safety of a nation where believers can freely share the gospel with them, both in word and deed.
    Many of those nations are closed to the gospel so the current tragic situation ought to be seen as an opportunity for the (allegedly) gospel believing evangelical community. Instead they peddle fear among themselves, led by their chosen political saviour, and push the needy away.

  17. February 2, 2017 at 2:48 pm

    The misogyny implicit in the following quote from Randles is probably “par for the course” from someone entrenched in the Trump camp.

    Mind you this will only work if he can outmaneuver the hysterical estrogen theater put on by the Left, the Media and by the same traitorous Republicans who necessitated a Trump in the first place, (cough cough,McCain and Lindsey Graham).

    (my emphasis – Tim)

    That one sentence from Randles’ post gives an indication of the prejudiced foundation upon which his current stance is built – a foundation and a stance that have NOTHING to do with the Kingdom of God, but everything to do with nationalistic political propaganda.

  18. 18 Marleen
    February 2, 2017 at 3:11 pm

    Men who fall for misogynistic thoughts like that are those who don’t see a problem with sucking up to a big strappin’ fella’ like the inestimable Vladimir Putin. You submit to a strong man, and don’t consider others. (You feel like maybe you’re masculine enough if you admire the jerk with the imported wife and so on.)

    I’m not only offended by the “estrogen” comment; in fact, that pales in my eyes. He called McCain and Graham traitors (or traitorous)? There is a ridiculous amount of arrogance involved, but no wonder. He is a fan of someone who put down McCain’s service as a soldier. And now Trump endangers our soldiers himself!!

  19. February 2, 2017 at 3:22 pm

    I agree totally.
    So many reasons why I find it necessary to “speak” out about the things this “teacher” is disseminating to his followers, especially since he has made a name for himself as a man exposing false prophets.

  20. 20 Jeanne T.
    February 2, 2017 at 11:27 pm

    “Have I called WOF a cult?”

    You’ve written that you were part of a cult. If so, which one?

  21. 21 Jeanne T.
    February 2, 2017 at 11:46 pm

    Is Kenneth Copeland a cult leader? Yes or no?

  22. February 2, 2017 at 11:46 pm

    I honestly could not get through all that self-regarding puffed up video, telling everyone who isn’t as ‘competent’ as he is that we are wrong to criticise Trump. Maybe they both belong to the same narcissist support group? But seriously, it is alarming how many genuine Christians (and you never said Bill Randles was anything else) cannot remove the veil from their eyes. It’s a corporate delusion. And one of the most disturbing aspects is the very same Christians who speak out against the NAR and the dominion agenda are now overlooking, at best, or going along with, at worst. the dominion agenda that Trump’s apostolic advisors are selling him (and through him, the rest of us.) I read credible information from inside the White House that Trump wants to “be a king” (his words, not theirs) and I suspect that being President is not yet the top of the tree as far as his aspirations go. He has further to go yet . Watch this space!!

  23. February 3, 2017 at 7:09 am

    Where did I say I was part of a cult?

    By the usual definition of “a cult” Kenneth Copeland is not a cult leader. He’s a false teacher, a false prophet and many other false things, but he is not isolated and exclusive, demanding that his followers withdraw from the world at large and follow only him.

    Cults are also notorious for causing followers to break all contact with their families. Therefore, maybe you should do a little investigation into the man whose “Trump Saves Civilisation” video Bill Randles recommended.

  24. February 3, 2017 at 7:15 am

    Thanks Trish,
    you said:

    …one of the most disturbing aspects is the very same Christians who speak out against the NAR and the dominion agenda are now overlooking, at best, or going along with, at worst.

    And THAT is one of the hardest things for me to understand about Bill Randle’s ongoing praise of Trump and his actions. Bill wrote quite a lot in the past to expose some of the same kind of dominionists that are Trump’s “apostolic advisers”.

  25. February 3, 2017 at 8:24 am

    Dear Trish, (and Onesimus) I have refrained from even entering into this discussion, because I have already found Onesimus to be set on playing ‘gotcha’ with me, something I have no time for. God knows who I am, what I believe and that is enough for me.
    But because you, Tricia have been a friend in the past I will pay you the respect of an answer. The article I posted did not “puff Trump” I merely noted that in the first week of his term, he has seemingly accomplished a very simple solution which eluded the previous Presidents who each were given eight years ! Whatever Trump is or will prove to be, I think it is obvious he is not bought and paid for by the Saudis. HE may prove to be better or worse, for in no way have I held Trump out to be the Saviour of America or of anything. Jesus is the only Savior I have, Onesimus, and it is despicable of you to publicly deny that about me. Trish Booth knows this, I would have thought she would have at least given me the benefit of the doubt, when she saw you disparaging me that way. God knows also what is in my heart.As for the video, I gave a disclaimer, explaining that the man wasn’t coming from a Biblical perspective, and that I didn’t agree with everything the man said, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

  26. February 3, 2017 at 8:39 am

    Bill, you say that Jesus is the only saviour you have – but you promote ON YOUR BLOG a video that proclaims Trump as the Saviour of Civilisation. A video that is presented by a man of dubious beliefs as revealed in the link I provided about Stefan Molyneux both on my blog and also in the comments on yours.

    However you deleted that link from your own blog, indicating that you refuse to accept any accountability for directing your followers to the site of a man who has advocated the permanent rejection and abandonment of families. Also indicating that you don’t wish others to check that man and his beliefs for themselves. (again I give that link: http://www.fdrliberated.com/brief-introduction-freedomain-radio/ )

    As for disparaging you, I’ve done nothing of the sort – I’ve tried to point out some serious issues with some of your recent posts, but you have shown a determination to hold on to areas of considerable SPIRITUAL error (in the recommendation of certain videos) all for the sake of promoting a political agenda that has nothing to do with the Kingdom of God, yet on the contrary is by its nature clearly at odds with His Kingdom.

  27. February 3, 2017 at 8:54 am

    Bill, you said in your reply to me “But because you, Tricia have been a friend in the past I will pay you the respect of an answer. The article I posted did not “puff Trump”…. Trish Booth knows this, I would have thought she would have at least given me the benefit of the doubt, when she saw you disparaging me that way.” Thank you for your response. I have chosen not to get involved nor comment about the other aspects of this thread, but merely to comment on the video itself, (rather than your own article) as I found that offensively arrogant. I had in mind to commend you at the same time as a well-meaning, straightforward and genuine Christian, but somehow that part got curtailed as I was interrupted in the middle of writing, but let me now therefore say it, and also reiterate that my comment was about both the video itself, and the general sense of delusion in America in particular with regard to the dominionist agenda.

  28. February 3, 2017 at 10:03 am

    Jeanne, you asked:

    When did you start reading Pastor Randles’ blogs? Have you viewed his videos? If so, when did you first do so? Who introduced you to Pastor Randles’ ministry? When?

    As I said in a previous answer, I was listening to Bill Randles’ sermons from about 10 years ago, as well as reading some of his books. I’m not sure how I came across his ministry, but it would probably have been through Christian Witness Ministries, an Australian group who hosted him as a guest speaker at their annual conferences. I never attended their conference because they were held in another state, but I bought quite a few of their ministry resources – and it may be through them that I bought Randles’ books

    As for his blog I can’t say exactly, but the following post of mine from exactly two years ago shows I’ve been visiting his blog for at least two years.

    https://onesimusfiles.wordpress.com/2015/02/04/what-about-israel-by-bill-randles/

  29. February 3, 2017 at 1:51 pm

    Why does Bill Randles keep deleting my comments from his blog in which I give information about Stefan Molyneux, the creator and presenter of the TRUMP SAVES CIVILISATION video that he recommended?

    Is he so afraid that his readers might do some checking for themselves?

    They seem to be the only comments of mine that he’s deleted over the past day…

    [update below]

    …until now. A few hours after originally posting this, he’s now gone back and deleted all of my comments from recent topics on his blog.

  30. 30 wakarusaguy
    February 3, 2017 at 11:21 pm

    I’d disagree entirely with Jeanne’s assertion that that unless someone has “denied Jesus, Christian doctrine, and the truth of the Bible,” they are not really a false teacher.

    A former pastor is a facebook “friend.” Every week he posts his sermon online: always completely orthodox theology. He posts standard salvationist Bible verses (John 3:16 , etc.), and comments on/interprets them with standard orthodox Christian piety.

    He also posts a daily mixture of standard “conservative” memes: hate-filled leftie-bashing (most directed at specific prominent individuals), “patriotism” (in the bad sense), Trump-defence, and glorification of the U.S. military. None of which, it’s safe to say, evidence the worldview, attitude. priorities…the “mind”…of Christ.

    I find that disturbing.

    He also re-posts, a couple times a week, some leftie-bashing, “patriotic,” Trump-defending meme that is verifiably false. One this week was the claim that George Soros (“This man was making policy with Hilary Clinton”) served in the SS (it included a photo of a young Nazi in uniform) at the close of World War II (“He said it was the best time of his life.”) Point being that “…some of you think Trump is dangerous. WOW !”

    The claims are false on the face of it (Soros was 14 at the end of the war…and Jewish !). Several trustworthy fact-checking sites which investigated the claims documented their falsity, in detail.

    Yesterday the pastor posted a horrific picture of dozens of burned bodies in an African village. The accompanying meme said that these were the bodies of Kenyan Christians torched by Muslim terrorists. (“The people liberals want to let into OUR country !!”) Tracing the photo back, it was a Reuters image of Congolese killed in the explosion of an oil-tanker.

    In both instances, I posted a comment to the pastor that the meme was not true, with links to the sites which documented its falsity. I’ve done so with each such meme he’s posted in the years I’ve been on facebook.

    The pastor has never responded in any way I’d consider honest: thanks for pointing out the lie, removing the lie from his “timeline,” apologies to the “friends” who follow him for associating his good name (and his profession) with a lie: no acknowledgement of any kind that any of his posts IS a lie.

    Most indicative of all is that he continues to post lies: despite (what would be to me, in those circumstances) the great embarrassment of certifying lies to those who trust one’s word, and despite having been alerted to a number of trustworthy sites where the veracity of memes can be fact-checked BEFORE posting.

    I consider this orthodox, conventionally-pious pastor a false teacher. Unrepentant love of lies has to be considered the most FUNDAMENTAL denial of Jesus, Christian doctrine and the Bible.

  31. 31 Marleen
    February 4, 2017 at 8:34 am

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kellyanne-conway-sexual-harassment_us_58920004e4b0522c7d3e3fc0

    This is an interesting article on the “alternative facts” lady. You’ve wondered why so many women voted for Trump. I’d say this is one reason, a big one, not the only one.

    Remember when one of the Trump sons said women who can’t handle what goes on in the working world should get out of it? And then he said they should go be teachers or something.

  32. February 6, 2017 at 7:30 am

    Thanks Steve,
    That “leftie bashing” is also a feature of the teacher I’ve been addressing, and is a sure sign that someone (usually American) has become far too devoted to right wing party-political dogma than truly representing Christ.

    Often the ideas of “the left” deserve bashing – but not all the time and not indiscriminately merely because they are considered “left wing”.

    The ideas of “Right” leaning politics always seem to be given a free pass by “evangelicals” without due scrutiny, but are no less anti-gospel than any other political persuasion.

    I said above “usually American”, while it is not always American evangelicals who display that characteristic, that influence on evangelical thought often comes from America – most likely (in my opinion) as a lingering effect of McCarthyism.

    But isn’t it ironic that the political favourite of leftie-bashing American evangelicals sees Vladimir Putin in such high regard?

  33. February 6, 2017 at 9:18 am

    I’d disagree entirely with Jeanne’s assertion that that unless someone has “denied Jesus, Christian doctrine, and the truth of the Bible,” they are not really a false teacher.

    Sadly, one only has to look at the comments on the link below to see how so many people are drawn into a false gospel steeped in patriotism.

    https://billrandles.wordpress.com/2017/02/02/is-trump-a-savior-thoughts-on-my-most-recent-post/

    _________________

    Also consider this from another thread on that same blog:

    For the price of settling a thousand disgruntled Muslim refugees in the (despised) West, Trump knows that you could settle 120,000 Muslims in “safe places” in the Middle East, establishing comfortable homes and safe, temporary communities in places much closer and much more agreeable to the refugees, saving the West millions of dollars ,countless rapes and murderers of its own citizenship and the serious destabilization of our once blessed nations.

    from
    https://billrandles.wordpress.com/2017/01/30/it-is-amazing-what-you-can-do-when-you-are-not-owned-by-the-saudis/

    It’s quite painful to even think of addressing this in detail, but here are a few objectionable points:

    1) “Disgruntled Muslim refugees” –

    I think having one’s who life ripped apart, family members killed, homes and livelihoods destroyed, would take a person far beyond “disgruntled. More like desperate. Devastated. Destitute.

    2) Settle Muslims in “safe places” in the middle east, establishing comfortable homes…etc.

    Didn’t they HAVE “safe places” “comfortable homes” in the Middle East – until the area was destabilised by Western military involvement?

    3) “communities…much more agreeable to the refugees”

    Much more agreeable in nations where access to the gospel is severely limited? Much more agreeable to keeping them separate from the gospel and entrenched in Islam?

    4)”saving the West millions of dollars”

    Now THAT seems to be closer to the real heart of the issue.

    5) “saving the West …countless rapes and murderers of its own citizenship and the serious destabilization of our once blessed nations.

    What are the comparative figures between “home grown” rapes and murders and those alleged to have been carried out by refugees? Is there a real escalated danger of rape and murder from refugees or is this merely playing the fear card? How many times did Jesus command “fear not!”?

    The latter part of the statement reflects the REAL agenda of those who see these views as valid. The real agenda relates to “our once blessed nations”. It does NOT relate to the Kingdom of God and God’s agenda – it does NOT relate to improving the chances of bringing more people (Muslim refugees) into the Kingdom of God, by welcoming them, loving them, and giving them an increased access to the gospel of Jesus Christ at a time when they have most reason to be disillusioned with their traditional religious background.

    I hope to be able to address these points again in a blog larger post where hopefully it will receive a wider readership than it would in this comment.

  34. 34 Marleen
    February 6, 2017 at 8:25 pm

    Tim, I would caution a bit of balance (and care for specific facts in one place and another) on #2 — yes, many of them had comfortable, safe homes. And it is so that “the west” has done quite a bit of destabilizing in various places. But the environments do have destabilizers of their own, and if that were not true I don’t know why they would be disillusioned with their own background. But I do agree that there is a sort of hype as to rapes, murders, and so forth as if our lily white men are so awesome and innocent (even if Christian). I also agree too much focus is on money — rather than the good for those people and the good of a welcoming attitude… and rather than valuing the lives of the apparently ubiquitous soldiers that most Americans don’t have to think about, who back up all the bravado in the name of national security. (Soldiers often mean well, but then are used as pawns too often, especially when Republicans get in there and act like we should blow up the world). And I agree it is dismissive to write people off as (#1) “disgruntled” and (#3) better off kept Muslim (or in whatever culture they are already surrounded by). [It probably wouldn’t hurt to point out, especially for those who have been hiding their brains and hearts in a pro-Trump bubble, that Russia isn’t fighting ISIL but fighting FOR Assad and against efforts (such as on our part, that is, previously) to get food and medicine to the people.]

    To anyone reading: I have been a conservative all my life. What I am saying is not lefty talk. And it has become more and more clear that too many “conservatives” mostly just want to vote Republican (although they deny this) and have come up with excuses after excuses until they are losing proper principles (if they ever really had them). One tell-tale sign is anything wrong being called “left” even when what is promoted or argued for is contradictory (showing that there is a lack of thinking or interest in information).

  35. 35 Marleen
    February 6, 2017 at 8:36 pm

    Wakarusaguy, I appreciate some of your specifics. For instance, the horrific picture of dozens of burned bodies in an African village. The accompanying meme [saying] that these were the bodies of Kenyan Christians torched by Muslim terrorists. (“The people liberals want to let into OUR country !!”)

    … and that [t]racing the photo back, it was a Reuters image
    of Congolese killed in the explosion of an oil-tanker.

    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Christians should
    hate slander —
    false witness.

  36. 36 Marleen
    February 16, 2017 at 9:14 am

    Tricia (February 2, 2017 at 11:46 pm) said:
    I honestly could not get through all that self-regarding puffed up video, telling everyone who isn’t as ‘competent’ as he is that we are wrong to criticise Trump. Maybe they both belong to the same narcissist support group? But seriously, it is alarming how many genuine Christians (and you never said Bill Randles was anything else) cannot remove the veil from their eyes. It’s a corporate delusion. And one of the most disturbing aspects is the very same Christians who speak out against the NAR and the dominion agenda are now overlooking, at best, or going along with, at worst. the dominion agenda that Trump’s apostolic advisors are selling him (and through him, the rest of us [or the general population].) ….

    I want to stand up for Tricia.

    Bill R. said:
    …. The article I posted did not “puff Trump” I merely noted that in the first week of his term, he has seemingly accomplished a very simple solution …. Jesus is the only Savior I have, Onesimus, and it is despicable of you to publicly deny that about me. Trish Booth knows this, I would have thought she would have at least given me the benefit of the doubt….
    [Bill repeated this “puff Trump” misrendering at his site.]

    And I want to also share something I posted at Bill’s site for attempted clarity:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/hillary-syria-fact-check_b_8333396.html
    …… because whoever calls for the U.S. to establish a “safe zone” in Syria — as Hillary did in her previous utterance to which Sanders was responding — is calling for “ground troops.”

    This fact was made clear by a well-publicized exchange in a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on September 16 between Senator John McCain, chair of the committee, and General Lloyd Austin, head of U.S. Central Command [“CENTCOM”], in which McCain pressed General Austin to say that he favored establishing “safe zones” in Syria and General Austin refused to do so, on the grounds that a “safe zone” would require a “ground force.” The video of the exchange is here. The full video of the hearing is here.

    ……

    Whoever calls for the U.S. to establish a “safe zone” in Syria is basically saying, “I agree with John McCain that we should send U.S. ground troops to Syria.”[*] Or else they are saying, “I believe in calling for a policy to be implemented without supporting the means to implement it.” Or else they are saying, “I believe in calling for a policy to be implemented without understanding or caring what means would be necessary to implement it.” Or else they are saying: “I believe that General Austin was lying when he said that ground troops would be necessary to establish a ‘safe zone.’” What are the other possibilities?

    [* Even if someone was in favor of our troops going to Syria in a previous year or circumstance, that doesn’t mean sending troops now would be a good idea or accomplish anything like the same aims.]

    The next person you meet on the street could be forgiven for not knowing that “safe zone” = “ground troops.” Not everyone watches Congressional hearings, or follows them in careful media. But anyone who is running to be President of the United States, who is criticizing the Obama Administration for not being “tough” enough in Syria, who claims to have a magic bullet called “safe zone” to make everything wonderful in Syria that the Obama Administration could easily use if only it were not so wimpy, must concede that “safe zone” means “ground troops,” so if they are calling for “safe zones,” they are calling for “ground troops.”

    You can urge Congress to oppose the use of US ground troops in Syria here
    [from a link connected to that word {here} at the site].

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-saudi-idUSKBN15D14L
    From the article/site referenced in the opening post by billrandles:

    The Saudi Press Agency, in an initial readout of the call, made no specific mention of safe zones, but said the two leaders had affirmed the “depth and durability of the strategic relationship” between the two countries.

    The agency later said “the custodian of the Two Holy Mosques had confirmed his support and backing for setting up safe zones in Syria”, but did not mention Yemen, where a Saudi alliance is fighting against the Iran-aligned Houthi group.

    {Reminder: Tricia didn’t comment on Bill’s full article or these maneuverings.
    Not the reason for my reposting these article sections (she is not, that is).}

  37. February 16, 2017 at 9:32 am

    Yes Marleen, Tricia was commenting on the “puffed up video” and not Bill Randles or the overall content of Bill Randles’ article.

    MY concern has been with Randles and the way he has recommended videos that very clearly manipulate their audience, misrepresenting evidence and even blatantly lying to get a political point across.
    Randles has every right to have his own political preferences, and even (if it’s important enough to him) to try to convince others of the validity of his preference. [Whether that is the role of a bible teacher may be debatable].

    But to use promotional materials that are clearly manipulative and rely on outright lies pushes the legitimacy of a bible teacher’s actions onto a very dangerous path.

    I suppose on occasion a video might present a mostly valid message while containing some questionable content – and there may be a need to weigh up the balance between the two, as long as any qualms about the questionable content are made clear. But the two videos recommended by Randles that I’ve specifically expressed concerns about have had no redeeming features.

  38. 38 Marleen
    February 17, 2017 at 5:04 am

    One of the questions asked at Randles’ site, gobsmacked with the supposed brilliance of Trump thinking of safe zones, is “Who would have thought?”This was presented as a simple solution.

    But other people had talked about safe zones in Syria before him.

    It has occurred to me: yesterday, Trump, at a podium with Netanyahu at another podium, said he’s in favor of either two states or one state. Whichever both Israel and the Palestinians like. I suppose we should be enthralled again: who would have thought of that?

    And it’s apparently fine when Trump says Israel should lay off with the settlements.

  39. 39 Marleen
    February 17, 2017 at 5:24 am

    Oh. I see you had responded before I posted just now. Sorry, I hadn’t seen that. I was (Feb. 16th) pointing out or standing up for what Tricia had said because I don’t think Bill Randles has cared to differentiate between what she was saying and what you have been saying. He lumped his misrendering of her words in with defending himself (at his site) against charges of having another saviour (generally how he said it). I’ve skimmed back through your posts. Did I miss where you yourself used the word “puffing” or “puff” — because he used puffing (Trump) at his site as he did here, when we can see she didn’t even say that here.

    Maybe he’s just drawing a logical conclusion, that if a video he shared was puffed up and was simultaneously pro Trump, then the video was puffing up Trump. But while he makes the connection in his own head, he nevertheless rejects it as what was happening (even if inadvertently) with a share.

  40. February 17, 2017 at 7:31 am

    I’m reasonably sure that I didn’t use the terms “puffing” or “puff”.

    Tricia described her response to the “self-regarding puffed up video” that Bill had recommended on his site, so the term “puffed up” was directed at neither Trump or Randles, so when he starts his defensive post on his blog by saying he’s been “unfairly accused by a few of ‘puffing Trump'” it’s clear he’s misrepresenting what HAS been said about the issue. And for being “accused by a few“, I’d like to know who those “few” may be.

    And again, for me, the MAJOR problem with Randles post (though not the only one) was his insistence on using that “self-regarding puffed up video” as some kind of justification. A video with a title image STILL broadcasting on Randles’ site that “Trump Saves Civilisation”.


Comments are currently closed.

Blog Stats

  • 68,025 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 226 other followers


%d bloggers like this: