Posthuman quotes and "My preaching"
(his posts are in bold and purple)
Post #7
threats of death or bodily harm are not covered by "free speech"
(no one at this point had said that it was. Although we have not seen the offending post on social media we are led to believe that it was a threat of bodily harm to Joe Biden and that it was a crime. No one had disputed that this man had been alleged to have committed a potential crime. The concern from the get go was that he was not given a trial. Simply executed by a pre dawn raid when he could have been picked up earlier when questioned by the FBI and they knew he did not pose an immediate threat to any person. He was in his house, alone. Why was he gunned down?)
Post #9
if i had to serve a warrant on a man who threatened to kill anyone who served a warrant, yes, i would be armed, if that's what you're asking.
This is Posthuman’s response. No one was asking that and it is unreasonable to interpret it this way.
Post #11
Eli's response is no less sinful than the rhetoric this man had been putting on the internet.
those things have consequences.
Notice how Posthuman didn’t say Eli’s post was illegal. Eli referred to the 2nd amendment and the government as being tyrannical. That is protected speech in the US.
Post #15
i do not support talking about overthrowing the government and threatening to shoot its representatives.
those things are evil, and worthy of condemnation. such speech is both immoral and illegal, and it will be righteously judged.
to me, the example here is that this secular, right-wing, seditious, violent rhetoric that has become so popular since 2008 is wicked and that as Christians we ought to have no part of it, much less celebrate it.
No one had celebrated this man’s actions, we don’t have enough information to even know exactly what his actions were. He told the FBI that he had had a dream and that is what he had posted. No one showed any support for “overthrowing the government” or “threatening to shoot its representatives”.
The only post that can be twisted to say that is Eli’s post, in order to do that you have to say that this is a threat to the US government:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
That is part of the Bill of Rights. This is the US constitution and the rights that it protects. Posthuman’s position is to deny the basic rights in the Bill of Rights, that is by definition, tyrannical.
Post #17
do you disagree his heart was clearly full of murderous thoughts?
Posthuman asked me this question. Think about this, I have yet to see any direct quote from this man. No news story has shown us what he wrote on, no one has quoted him directly. How on earth would I know what was in his heart?
This is convicting him before we even get to hear from him. What Posthuman is saying here is heinous.
51 “Does our law condemn a man without first hearing him to find out what he has been doing?”
Post #27
postman asked me this:
What exactly do you find reprehensible about what I am saying here?
I responded in Post #28
Sending a SWAT team to a 70 year old, homebound man's house, gunning him down in his house, dragging his body out into the street to bleed out and then leaving him there is justifiable because of his "thoughts".
Did he have a criminal record? No.
Had he committed a crime? No.
Was there an imminent threat to someone's life inside his house at the time they shot him? No.
Had he been charged and convicted of a crime? No.
Had he been charged with a crime? No.
I can understand why the FBI would want to question him. However, a pre dawn raid with a SWAT team which was a cover for a kill squad, that is reprehensible and any reasonable person would agree.
This is my “preaching”. How is this “evil”?
