Two of the most interesting truth-tellers today, a Muslim (Barrett) and a Catholic (Jones), discuss sundry topics, including particular news stories of the week, the social media oddity that is Candace Owens, and whether Trump had a miracle on that particular day or not.
Yes – re parting ways with EMJ at 38:00 re the ‘assassination attempt’ on Trump. EMJ is fast fading to be a distant speck in the rear vision mirror. I liked Kevin’s sarcastic response about it being a ‘miracle’. I watched Kevin with Ron Unz yesterday by the way – I am still not taking sides on Candace Owens but it is not looking good. When did she find time to do the five years of reading it takes to articulate her sudden ‘revisionist’ stance on WWII? (Which happens to be absolutely True.) I agree with Ron Unz's assessment.
Yes. EMJ is perhaps too optimistic on some topics to be a reliable source for guidance on them. I have noticed EMJ's tendency to be a bit naive about some narratives, too. His intentions are to hope for the good of all people, with a view to humanity's salvation in the light of Catholic teaching and belief.
Yet, who scores 100% with us on every single issue that we find important?
It's a continuing psychological war we wage with the satanic cabal, who love to mix fact and fiction, truth and lies, in order to sow more confusion and heat instead of light.
It all falls to each of us to discern the truth as we see it, and we will not agree with most anyone else on every vital topic. And perhaps that's a healthier way of being at this time.
Thank you for sharing this; looking forward to listening to it.
You're very welcome! It's always a fun and enlightening listen with Kevin and his guests!
Yes – re parting ways with EMJ at 38:00 re the ‘assassination attempt’ on Trump. EMJ is fast fading to be a distant speck in the rear vision mirror. I liked Kevin’s sarcastic response about it being a ‘miracle’. I watched Kevin with Ron Unz yesterday by the way – I am still not taking sides on Candace Owens but it is not looking good. When did she find time to do the five years of reading it takes to articulate her sudden ‘revisionist’ stance on WWII? (Which happens to be absolutely True.) I agree with Ron Unz's assessment.
Yes. EMJ is perhaps too optimistic on some topics to be a reliable source for guidance on them. I have noticed EMJ's tendency to be a bit naive about some narratives, too. His intentions are to hope for the good of all people, with a view to humanity's salvation in the light of Catholic teaching and belief.
Yet, who scores 100% with us on every single issue that we find important?
It's a continuing psychological war we wage with the satanic cabal, who love to mix fact and fiction, truth and lies, in order to sow more confusion and heat instead of light.
It all falls to each of us to discern the truth as we see it, and we will not agree with most anyone else on every vital topic. And perhaps that's a healthier way of being at this time.