יום שני, 9 בינואר 2017

twenty six 26 books in 24 hours or 6 books in 6 minutes!

someone recommended I listen to a summary of the old testament. the idea was to summarise the books of the old-testament I count 26 books, IN 24 lectures each one hour.
to feel the PACE I started with the second "lecture" and it was about exodus.
when summarising genesis it can be summarised as "many hate stories" and therefore a book to avoid and not summarise further.
*genesis summary: this book has many hate stories and also stories with a message of injustice... that is the summary and reason cause to avoid the bad contents.
introduction: exodus can be summarised in three parts 1 going out of egypt with plagues, 2 laws 3 the wood-tent. note when summarising exodus and leviticus
***only twenty minutes remained in the lecture for "numbers" book so the lecturer failed and did not summarize the contents of numbers but only a few bits.
*** worse was the failure with less than five 5 minutes to summarize the long book deuteronomy handled by saying "all of deuteronomy is 'god is one' the end" failure to summarize the contents. so the whole mission I challenge and reject and warn to avoid plus I will attempt to replace.
*exodus this book is already summarized in the book of joshua: joshua 24 "the israelites entered egypt and moses with aron led the israelites out and egypts suffered from plagues. the egyptian army chased them to the sea and the sea covered the egyptians. then the israelites dwelled in the desert for many years." who decides what is important joshua or god through the prophet named joshua that is the summary. this summarises part one the going out is with plagues. the seconfd part when moses went up we should wait and see if he taught it when he came down so skip from going up to vcoming down in chpter 34-35. the third part is a problem, if the book chronicles is true then god DENIED asking for a wood tent also second-samuel-7 and the book exodus lied. bad book also self-contradiction in years of generation in egypt 350 or less against 430 so the book certainly is a bad book. jews corrupt the second source claiming 200 years will christians corrupt the other source claiming 400 years like abraham also not 430. bad book and no wooden tent so we conclude exodus.
*leviticus summary: if we believe jospeus the animal-sacrifices for sin are with the holiday sacrifices and should not be interrupted so it is good to remove chapters 4 to 23. the sacrifices themselves are a problem if we beilieve the book of jeremia is good as religions teach then god DENIED commanding animal sacrifices with the word no/not I did not caommand sacrifices in the context of EAT them yourselves a similar message on isiah wich the religious corrupt but we should not believe the lies of leviticus because the god of israelites said through jeremia i did not command so believe god and reject the bad book of lies calledlevitivcus.
we have arrivesd at numbers with much more than twenty minutes.
*numbers too is summarised in joshua 24 and in the summary what is imprtant? god chose what is important in the summary. so the summary in joshua (24) is not only brief but truly is a complete summary which can replace all the pages from the start of "genesis until the end of joshua, end of chapter 23" without most of joshua itself because "not with your sword" reveals the lies in the beginning of the book joshua. six books in about six minutes!

clarification

in my previous post I described obama "shooting wildly in all directions"
http://tomsawyerssongs.blogspot.co.il/2017/01/obama-against-israel.html
 insulting russia with ambassador story and not helping the middle-eastern-ally Israel in the UN. it is easy to convince one person to be anti-israel especially if obama studied under muslim education as a child but to get a majority in congress to oppose obama shows that these congressman understand diplomacy and alliances. BRITIAN criticised the obama administration for being too harsh with israel. now I clarify what I refferred to in britian relations.
instead of apologizing, in response to british criticsm, obama shot back at the british, criticising their criticsm- as published NINE DAYS AGO not as I wrote "weeks ago" I refferred to the criticism and claimed obama was ending his diplomacy, now that he NO LONGER NEEDS the cooperation for his personal agenda so he can insult all over.
I concluded that this demonstrates that obama was what the racists suspected. there is some doubt which of obama's race and religion can be trusted and which cannot be trusted because their loyalty is first to something else but there is NO DOUBT and with certainty that the total of convicted criminals of all races plus "committed crimes not yet caught" would be much-much lower if those in obama's race were busy in the cotton fields. whether president or judges who might be "loyal first to their own race before justice" hence if all of that race would still be slaves, in the past, then with certainty the number of committed crimes as well as convicted criminals would be much much less.
could the first step to making a significant reduction in crime be slavery? I will need to study the statistics and demographics.
this site should show the demographics but hides them
https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=942
oh well. 

יום חמישי, 5 בינואר 2017

obama against... israel?

recently the United nations criticed Israel about something. was
obama's decision (not to veto) AGAINST israel?
considering that obama also pissed off the russians at the same time, by sending away ambasadors as well as insulting britian a few weeks ago.
*we see a pattern this is not specifically anti-israel but the fact that obama NO LONGER NEEDS TO COOPERATE INTERNATIONALLY so he insults everyone he personnaly does not need.
this is because until now he needed international cooperation but no longer. 
he hopes that the pissed off allies will want revenge at america but putin and the allies are aware that obama is the decider and wait patiently to cooperate with trump showing just how bad obama is and who is the bigger man.
obama showed himself to be what every racist suspected him to be. if only obama was still a slave in the south. what is done is done.
the british hypocrytes complain about this despite they voted for "israels condemnation" huh?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinians-britain-idUSKBN14J0L0
 and then accuse obama for not veto-ing- there can be some explanation:
they only voted thinking it WOULD HAVE  been veto-ed? hmm.