Having just seen Jake Paul, in an act of narcissistic self-destruction, get thoroughly blarted by a past-his-prime boxer, I have no doubt about his suitability as Trump's successor. It's all part of America's descent into idiocracy.
They might both be showmen but they are also both utter fools.
And thanks for chronicling the Iran omni-shambles. But I think you missed one very important element. And you probably have the right connections to follow it up:
'U.S. Troops Were Told Iran War Is for “Armageddon,” Return of Jesus'
This is not the work of a single religious crackpot in the senior officer ranks. It is reported to have been a widespread occurrence across the entire US military. It worrying since it undercuts the widespread belief that the military is a stabilising counterweight to Trump. With hindsight, it also puts into clear context Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckerbee's repeated statements over the last year that he expects and welcomes Armageddon and the End Times.
Nuanced? Seems pretty full of fallacies and specious arguments to me. Here's a few of many:
1.That it's not a story because no one else has reported it. No reporter should ever accept that. It's why I suggested you—with your extensive US military contacts—might like to check it out.
2. Mehta points out that these officers are not on a crusade. Correct but he's knocking over a straw doll. He doesn't know if, for example, these commanders briefed their troops spontaneously as individuals, or unofficially as group, or, indeed, in collusion. In fact, he supplies no evidence at all to contradict the report.
3. Mehta uses ad hominen attacks to undermine the reporting. Pretty unpleasant, irrelevant and suggestive of a hidden agenda.
4. He suggest the emails are forged. I invite you run the emails Mehta claims were all written by the same hand through text comparison software. I did. With three different services. They all came back negative. CompareText (https://comparetwotext.com) even provided a granular breakdown, with the Flesch-Kincaid Grade differential being more than four educational years between the two samples. If they were written by the same hand, the FKs would be the same.
I don't know what this guy's agenda is but he's no journalist.
Oh, and for wider context, go read Ambassador Huckerbee's interviews about wars to hasten the End Times. And I guarantee his interpretation is very different to Mehta's. One of these guys was and is central to decision-making in this conflict. The other is not. Only Huckerbee's interpretation is relevant.
Having just seen Jake Paul, in an act of narcissistic self-destruction, get thoroughly blarted by a past-his-prime boxer, I have no doubt about his suitability as Trump's successor. It's all part of America's descent into idiocracy.
They might both be showmen but they are also both utter fools.
And thanks for chronicling the Iran omni-shambles. But I think you missed one very important element. And you probably have the right connections to follow it up:
'U.S. Troops Were Told Iran War Is for “Armageddon,” Return of Jesus'
https://jonathanlarsen.substack.com/p/us-troops-were-told-iran-war-is-for
This is not the work of a single religious crackpot in the senior officer ranks. It is reported to have been a widespread occurrence across the entire US military. It worrying since it undercuts the widespread belief that the military is a stabilising counterweight to Trump. With hindsight, it also puts into clear context Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckerbee's repeated statements over the last year that he expects and welcomes Armageddon and the End Times.
I think this is a pretty nuanced comment on that news of the Armageddon speech:
https://www.friendlyatheist.com/p/before-you-share-that-story-about?r=np4n&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true
Nuanced? Seems pretty full of fallacies and specious arguments to me. Here's a few of many:
1.That it's not a story because no one else has reported it. No reporter should ever accept that. It's why I suggested you—with your extensive US military contacts—might like to check it out.
2. Mehta points out that these officers are not on a crusade. Correct but he's knocking over a straw doll. He doesn't know if, for example, these commanders briefed their troops spontaneously as individuals, or unofficially as group, or, indeed, in collusion. In fact, he supplies no evidence at all to contradict the report.
3. Mehta uses ad hominen attacks to undermine the reporting. Pretty unpleasant, irrelevant and suggestive of a hidden agenda.
4. He suggest the emails are forged. I invite you run the emails Mehta claims were all written by the same hand through text comparison software. I did. With three different services. They all came back negative. CompareText (https://comparetwotext.com) even provided a granular breakdown, with the Flesch-Kincaid Grade differential being more than four educational years between the two samples. If they were written by the same hand, the FKs would be the same.
I don't know what this guy's agenda is but he's no journalist.
Oh, and for wider context, go read Ambassador Huckerbee's interviews about wars to hasten the End Times. And I guarantee his interpretation is very different to Mehta's. One of these guys was and is central to decision-making in this conflict. The other is not. Only Huckerbee's interpretation is relevant.