Recent posts

#1

Off the Record / Re: Dead Pool 2024

Last post by Barrister - Today at 03:45:38 PM

OJ Simpson sort-of reminds me of Michael Jackson.  MJ went through a big child sex abuse trial in (googles - 2005).  He was acquitted.  People seemed quite happy about that.  In the years since then the reputation of MJ has completely shifted though and people recognize he was a serial child sex abuser.

Maybe - with Jackson. I mean there's a biopic coming out next year starring his nephew but also with, say, Colman Domingo and Miles Teller in it.

I don't know what that will or won't cover.

Ive gotten the opposite impression, that Jacksons reputation has been largely rehabilitated with the general public. 

I don't think so.

I mean I think where we went through a phase where people weren't sure if it was okay to play his music, and now that's gone away, but I don't think anyone's views on MJ himself have improved.

#2

Off the Record / Re: Dead Pool 2024

Last post by Eddie Teach - Today at 03:33:23 PM

OJ Simpson sort-of reminds me of Michael Jackson.  MJ went through a big child sex abuse trial in (googles - 2005).  He was acquitted.  People seemed quite happy about that.  In the years since then the reputation of MJ has completely shifted though and people recognize he was a serial child sex abuser.

Maybe - with Jackson. I mean there's a biopic coming out next year starring his nephew but also with, say, Colman Domingo and Miles Teller in it.

I don't know what that will or won't cover.

Ive gotten the opposite impression, that Jacksons reputation has been largely rehabilitated with the general public. 

#3

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by Barrister - Today at 03:02:01 PM

I was thinking " there was a similar story like a year ago", then I saw the date lol.

D'oh!

#4

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by HVC - Today at 02:50:33 PM

I was thinking " there was a similar story like a year ago", then I saw the date lol.

Around the same time there was a trend on YouTube for "hacks" for intentional students, and chief amongst them were using food banks. Sucks they don't have food, but part and parcel of getting a student visa is being able to be self sufficient. I *think* they're allowed 20 hours a week to work. A lot of Indian student were taking high interest loans to show in their bank accounts when applying, and then paying the amount back, essentially defrauding the system.


*edit* I mention Indian because Brampton is known for a large Indian immigrant community.

#5

Off the Record / Re: [Canada] Canadian Politics...

Last post by Barrister - Today at 02:46:22 PM

So here's another social media mini-firestorm.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/no-international-students-as-need-grows-brampton-food-bank-turning-some-away-1.7024375

Food bank in Brampton, ON puts up signs saying International Students are not allowed.

Now to be fair the word "racism" is never used.  But this does seem part and parcel with the huge increase in international students coming to Canada the last few years.  The move has attracted a fair bit of negative criticism - as well as support.

The point is supposed to be that International students are supposed to show that t hey are self-reliant when they apply to come to Canada - precisely so they don't start using social services.  Now food banks aren't government-run (an international student couldn't apply for welfare) but international students using food banks does seem contrary to that basic principle.

What say you Languish?

#6

Off the Record / Re: Israel-Hamas War 2023

Last post by Valmy - Today at 02:38:53 PM

For example weekly service attendance is a big indicator for Jews and Christians at how religious they are. Like 55% of Protestants in the United States attend church once a week or more. 25% of Jews do. 30% of Catholics do.

Wow, I knew American Jews were backsliding, but I didn't realize things had gotten so bad that 1/4 were attending Church.

Religious services. The Protestants are attending church.

#7

Off the Record / Re: Israel-Hamas War 2023

Last post by Tamas - Today at 02:14:46 PM

So now that the Rafah operation is about to begin Hamas is suddenly much more open to a ceasefire. Who would have thought.

[One of the most senior special forces officers in the British Army broke ranks and reported to police that SAS soldiers under his command committed war crimes by murdering prisoners in Afghanistan, The Sunday Times can reveal.]

#8

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Sheilbh - Today at 02:10:59 PM

Very long and damning article on SAS war crimes in Afghanistan. This is obviously very, very bad:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sas-murders-war-crime-british-special-forces-vbcnmpkm8

Striking similarities with similar reports in the Australian and US military. Particularly in the case of the US as here it looks like the SBS in the region wanted nothing to do with this unit and clearly thought they'd gone wrong, I believe I've read of a similar dynamic in the US between Navy SEALs and Army special forces.

Some key points:

The SAS murders: how a senior officer exposed a war crime cover-up
British special forces are accused of holding killing contests and planting weapons on their Afghan victims. Previously classified files show how one of their own is trying to bring them to justice
Insight |
Jonathan Calvert, George Arbuthnott, David Collins
Sunday May 05 2024, 12.01am, The Sunday Times

One of the most senior special forces officers in the British Army broke ranks and reported to police that SAS soldiers under his command committed war crimes by murdering prisoners in Afghanistan, The Sunday Times can reveal.

The officer — who oversaw all special forces operations — told detectives from the Royal Military Police (RMP) that a "cancer had infected" a rogue SAS squadron that had murdered dozens of unarmed detainees.

He came forward despite his fears that SAS soldiers would inflict violent reprisals against his family if they knew he was blowing the whistle. He alleged their crimes were so serious that the entire regiment needed a "complete overhaul".

The officer, known only by the cipher N1466, revealed to police the location of a safe containing a typed report detailing a disclosure from an SAS soldier that his unit had routinely murdered Afghan prisoners in their homes and planted weapons on their dead bodies.

His intervention prompted one of Britain's biggest murder inquiries and is now revealed in 6,000 top-secret documents, which the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has been forced to disclose.

Emails show that several other senior special forces commanders were aware that war crimes had been committed, but failed to report the killings.

[...]

Internal emails between detectives investigating SAS killings show how their inquiries were thwarted after being reported to Downing Street. The prime minister was David Cameron, who is now foreign secretary.

According to one email, the chief police investigator complained he was put under "political pressure" to drop inquiries into senior SAS commanders.

[...]

When the inquiry was eventually shut down, emails show that the defence minister, Johnny Mercer, a veteran of the Afghan war, told the MoD he believed the SAS was guilty of wrongdoing and the allegations had not been properly investigated. But a civil servant toned down his comments for the official record. "Bland is best," he wrote.

The Sunday Times revealed in 2017 that a rogue SAS unit was alleged to have murdered unarmed Afghan civilians and falsified mission reports. At the time, the MoD said there was no evidence to support the story, no soldiers had been arrested and only one case of unlawful killing in Afghanistan was being investigated. All of this has proved to be untrue.

Our subsequent stories, a BBC Panorama documentary and a legal case brought by the law firm Leigh Day on behalf of the bereaved families led to the creation of the Independent Inquiry relating to Afghanistan, chaired by Lord Justice Haddon-Cave, a senior appeal court judge. The inquiry's remit is to establish: whether there is credible evidence that the British Army unlawfully killed people in Afghanistan between 2010 and 2013; whether the military police carried out a proper investigation; and whether there was an attempt to cover up war crimes. It is looking at 80 killings and began taking evidence in July.

This has forced the release of the previously secret documents and correspondence, and has led to hours of testimony being given by soldiers and ministers. It has enabled The Sunday Times to tell, for the first time, the story of the SAS whistleblowers and how the investigation into their allegations was stopped in its tracks.

[...]

Martin attended confidential "board meetings" where the SAS identified targets. He says he repeatedly expressed severe misgivings about the "flawed" intelligence used to justify the raids, which often resulted in innocent people being killed. The SAS soldiers were said to have begun killing their captives out of frustration that so many were being released.

By February 2011, N1466 and other senior commanders had become extremely concerned about one particular SAS squadron that was nine weeks into a six-month tour of duty in Afghanistan. The squadron's post-mission reports from the raids showed that large numbers of Afghan citizens were being killed rather than captured.

They had received a complaint from Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, about one of the killings: the shooting of Mohammed Ibrahim, a civilian former district governor, in Nawroz, Helmand province.

The 55-year-old had worked alongside British forces and was not the target of the raid. However, the SAS claimed he had grabbed a grenade from behind a curtain after being taken into his home at gunpoint to help the soldiers search the premises. He was shot dead at close range before he could pull the pin, according to the soldiers' account.

This was one of several similar incidents involving the squadron and the newly disclosed MoD documents reveal that N1466 was growing increasingly suspicious about the death toll. Then there were two more incidents.

On the nights of February 7 and 9, the squadron had shot dead 17 people — including two children — in their homes during two raids but only recovered seven weapons from the scenes. Since the SAS was his responsibility, N1466 assessed the numbers and believed them to be "disproportionate", which reinforced his view the unit was "out of control". Page's chief of staff received an email from another worried officer, a lieutenant colonel who was a special forces operations director.

He wrote: "I find it quite incredible the amount of Bs [Afghan males, Bravos] that [the SAS unit] send back into a building who then decide to get weapons/grenades and engage the [SAS unit] knowing that it will achieve nothing.

"Why come out — why not wait for the [SAS unit] to come into the room and engage them in a confined space where there is a greater chance of causing cas[ualties]? Whilst murder and the UKAF [special forces] have oft been regular bedfellows, this is beginning to look bone."

The chief of staff, who is the second-highest ranking commander in special forces, emailed back making reference to a recent boast by the SAS that it had killed more "insurgents" than a similar unit from another country. "I find it depressing that it has come to this," he wrote. "Ultimately a massive failure of leadership."

He did not think the SAS's explanations for the killings were credible. "If we don't believe this, then no one else will and when the next WikiLeaks occurs then we will be dragged down with them," he wrote.

On February 14, 2011, the operations director observed in an email that the SAS appeared to be deliberately "setting the conditions for the Afghans' execution" by sending the detainees back into their home to help the search.

The chief of staff replied: "There appears to be a casual disregard for life, [military] principles and credible reporting."

On February 16, another raid took place in which two Afghan prisoners were taken back into their home and were shot after the SAS claimed they had grabbed weapons from behind a curtain and a table.

Emails exchanged between special forces commanders at the directorate in London that day ceased calling the unit's victims EKIA, an acronym for enemy killed in action. Instead, they were given the initials EJK, which stands for extra-judicial killings or, in other words, murder.

At the end of March 2011, N1466 attended a dinner at the headquarters of the Special Boat Service (SBS) — sister service of the SAS — in |Poole for the regiment's commanding officer Colonel Gwyn Jenkins.

In the bar after the dinner, Jenkins, who was leaving the role to take command of special forces in Afghanistan, took N1466 to one side to share a problem that was troubling him.

SBS troops in Afghanistan were reporting that SAS soldiers had confessed to operating a "deliberate policy" of murdering all "fighting age males". An SBS officer had been asked to type out a statement reporting what he had been told.

The statement, which has been revealed in legal submissions to the inquiry, said: "During conversations with a soldier from [the SAS unit] ... it was said that 'all fighting age males are killed on target' regardless of the threat they posed, this included those not holding weapons.

"It was also indicated that fighting-age males were being murdered on target inside compounds, using a variety of methods after they had been restrained. In one case it was mentioned a pillow was put over the head of an individual being killed with a pistol.

"It was implied that photos would be taken of the deceased alongside weapons that the 'fighting age male' may not have had in their position [sic] when they were killed."

The claim was that SAS soldiers had placed a 'drop weapon' next to the corpses of their victims to make it look as if they had been armed and the soldiers had been shot in self-defence.

[...]

Jenkins decided to write to Page repeating what he had told N1466. He said the allegations about the SAS were "of a nature which makes me seriously concerned for the reputation of [UK armed forces]" and should be formally investigated.

[...]

N1466 also emailed Page calling for a "deeper investigation" to make a clear statement to special forces or "at worst put a stop to criminal behaviour". He feared the SAS may have "strayed into indefensible ethical and legal behaviour".

[...]

N1466 commissioned an analysis of some of the SAS unit's recent raids which found that 43 Afghan men had been killed in nine missions — while only 26 weapons were said to have been recovered. He found there were 11 incidents where Afghan men had been shot dead after being captured and sent back into their homes at gunpoint.

When he was shown the findings, Page ordered an internal review of the incidents rather than report the matter to the military police. The review took a week and was ultimately written by the overall commander of the SAS unit in Afghanistan that was under investigation. He accepted his own soldiers' claims that the killings were in self-defence and claimed the insurgents were provoking suicidal confrontations that could be used as propaganda against the British Army.

The matter was closed. "In hindsight," N1466 later told the military police, "I should have made it clear to [Page] that the issue should be taken to the service police."

The SBS officer's statement about the SAS's "deliberate policy" of killing fighting age males was placed in a safe at the SBS headquarters by Jenkins because, he later explained to military police, Page had been "unhappy about the nature of the information".

Today, Jenkins is a general and last week was named Britain's national security adviser.

[...]

Two months later, another SAS unit shot dead three youngsters — aged 12, 14, 16 — and a youth aged 18 while they were drinking tea in a room during a night raid in Loi Bagh, Helmand.

The shootings caused such an outcry that news reached the UK and the families of the victims were taken on by British lawyers. This prompted the RMP to investigate an SAS night raid killing for the first time.

Submissions to the inquiry show that the SAS mission report falsely claimed that Afghan soldiers had shot the victims after coming under fire. The SAS produced mission report photographs showing weapons beside the corpses.

But the military police established that the young men were killed by a single SAS soldier who had burst into their room. The victims had not fired a shot.

The RMP detectives knew nothing about the regiment's series of night raid killings the previous year or the allegations about photographing "drop weapons". But they found the initial evidence sufficiently compelling to begin a full murder inquiry.

It proved to be a tough investigation. One Afghan soldier who witnessed the shootings was said to be dead and another brain damaged. The special forces' reconnaissance footage of the scene had been overwritten and a "hard drive error" flashed up when the investigators tried to retrieve it.

One frustrated investigator commented: "How could so many things go wrong with one aspect?"

Newly disclosed diary entries and emails show how in February 2014, the senior investigating officer, Major Morag Sheather, was interviewing an Afghan soldier about the killings when a senior British special forces officer intervened to stop him talking.

As a result, Sheather's immediate superior formally recorded his concerns that "we are being obstructed in our investigation". Weeks later, the locks were changed around the perimeter of the SAS's base in Afghanistan which stopped the RMP entering.

Sheather had also been seeking to obtain a machinegun and an AK47 assault rifle that had been retrieved from the victims' bodies so that they could be forensically examined. She was finally told she could collect the weapons in late March 2014.

But the guns were missing when she travelled to pick them up in Afghanistan. She wrote in her diary on March 29 that the person with the weapons "does not have the items due to 'confusion'. Hmm!"

She was then told the weapons would be made available the next week but a few days later they had gone. It was claimed the guns had been recycled or sold for parts. "Unbelievable," she wrote in her diary.

Despite the setbacks and after a two-year investigation, the RMP referred the SAS soldier to military prosecutors on four counts of murder. Both the senior officer, who had falsified the mission report, and the SAS commander, who stopped the interview with the Afghan witness, were also referred for the offences of misconduct in public office and perverting the course of justice, respectively.
Then in October 2014, Leigh Day raised the case of Saifullah Yar and his uncle Mohammed Bang. They claimed the British Army had murdered four members of their family during the night raid on their home on February 16, 2011.

The SAS claimed the killings were in self-defence and that Saifullah's father had reached behind the curtain for a grenade after being taken back into his home at gunpoint. The family alleged he had been taken back in the building to be murdered. A new RMP investigation began.

N1466 knew all about the incident in which Saifullah's family were killed. Emails show his colleagues had referred to it as "the latest massacre". Three months after the new investigation started, N1466 decided to approach the RMP and tell them what he knew.

Suddenly, the RMP had one of the most senior figures in the special forces willing to talk to them about the SAS's night raids. He was taking a big risk. An RMP captain noted in his log that N1466 feared SAS soldiers might inflict violent reprisals against his family if they knew he was talking to the police.

Nevertheless, he met the RMP chief, Brigadier Bill Warren, and told him that "a cancer had infected" the SAS and there were dozens of other murders they should be investigating.

He alerted the detectives to a practice of "blooding-in" SAS recruits by ordering them to shoot prisoners and alleged there was a competition between the regiment's squadrons over how many people they killed.

[...]

N1466 gave the RMP the breakthrough it needed. Soon afterwards, the military police began investigating ten of the night raids that had been part of the review by the special forces headquarters four years earlier. The investigating team were moved to a new base at RAF St Mawgan in Cornwall for security and a £7 million computer system was ordered so that the SAS's servers could be downloaded and searched.

The investigation was now called Operation Northmoor. In February 2016, plans were made to arrest two suspects: the commanding officer of the SAS unit and the soldier who had allegedly confessed.

News of the rapidly expanding investigation filtered through to the top of government. Soon after the suspects were identified, the parliamentary private secretary to the defence minister, Michael Fallon, wrote an email warning Cameron's Downing Street office about the inquiry and copying in the cabinet secretary and the attorney-general.

"Information from highly credible armed forces sources," the note dated February 19, 2016, began. "The RMP are now investigating a number of cases of suspected murder of Afghans by members of [UK special forces]."

Alarm bells rang in government. Not long after, a Whitehall source tipped off The Sunday Times that the RMP was investigating "credible and extremely serious" accusations of war crimes by the SAS and the government was "trying to reduce the scale of the investigation".

Internal emails from the RMP show that within months, the inquiry's lead detective was complaining that his team were under "political pressure" to focus its investigation on junior SAS soldiers rather than their commanders.

An opportunity arose that summer for the MoD to shake up the investigation as both the provost marshal and its lead detective, the "gold commander", were retiring. In summer 2016, Brigadier David Neal became provost marshal and John Harvey took over as gold commander.

Neal's appointment was controversial internally. At the time, he was fending off accusations from a fellow RMP officer that he had attempted to improperly close down an unlawful killing allegation against a British soldier. He was also a friend of the SAS officer who had commanded the squadron at the centre of the investigation, according to MoD documents.

[...]

The RMP could have simply seized the server but the lead investigator's log dated August 15, 2016, notes that the gold commander wanted him to "recover the data set amicably without ... using our prerogative powers".

Eventually special forces relented but the investigators were furious when they turned up to copy the server in December. All the previously deleted data, which would have been accessible on the server, had been permanently expunged when contractors installed a new system that summer.

The contractors say they warned special forces they were destroying the deleted data but there were no objections or attempts to prevent them.

[...]

The SAS then reneged on its agreement to provide access to the remaining data on the server.

The senior investigator urged the gold commander to use the force's prerogative powers. "Any delay in recovery risks the loss of evidence and the ability to conduct a prompt and effective investigation, leaving the enquiry and the RMP open to criticism," he wrote.

The gold commander declined the request. In the end, the server was never obtained by the military police.

[...]

Then the RMP investigators were ordered to cut ties with advisers from the National Crime Agency and Greater Manchester police whose greater experience in killings had helped to guide their previous inquiries.

As a replacement, the MoD appointed an advisory group, consisting of a former chief constable and a criminal barrister, who enlisted two former police detectives to do a paper review of the state of the investigation in January 2017.

The inquiry now involved at least 50 murders but the former detectives were given only eight days for their review. They could not examine all the material but concluded nonetheless that the evidence was "untested, untried and without provenance".

Crucially, they decided that the chief suspects — the SAS soldier who made the confession and his commander — should not be arrested because it would be "profoundly unhelpful" to the investigation.

[...]

The result was that the two prime suspects were never even interviewed because they had left the army.

[...]

Behind the scenes, later that day, Peter Ryan, the director of judicial engagement at the MoD, wrote to Stephen Lovegrove, the MoD's permanent secretary, assuring him that the investigation had already been brought under control.

"Focus is now on one incident with the several others on the back burner in case anything emerges," he explained. "RMP now have no suspects ... Prospects for successful prosecutions look slim. In turn that conditions the investigative strategy and expectations about when this may be wrapped up. Did bad things happen? Quite possibly."

[...]

A full transcript of the tape-recorded conversation with the SAS soldier was provided to the Afghan war crimes inquiry. In the interview, he said his unit had killed more than 300 people in its six-month tour, relentlessly "whacking them every day, non-stop" to clear Helmand of suspected insurgents. "I was like a f***ing kid in a sweet shop to be honest," he said.

He said it was futile to take prisoners because they would be released days after being handed over to the Afghan police. So he admitted that he and his colleagues had routinely shot dead unarmed Afghan captives and planted weapons on their corpses.

"The OC's [officer commanding] opening brief is 'kill, capture', it's not the other way round. It's kill, capture ... and that's how we worked," he said. "It was like Northern Ireland, mate, if they're not armed there and then, it's a little bit of a grey area but we managed. Obviously we get smart. We know how to deal with these people and that's what we did."

[...]

When the RMP interviewed serving members of the rogue SAS unit and their support staff they claimed to have little to no recollection of the incidents. A judge would later question this "collective amnesia".

However, the investigators did receive important new evidence. An Afghan officer who had served alongside the SAS alleged the unit regularly carried an old AK47 with them which they planted on dead bodies to pretend their victims had been armed.

A British Army weapons expert, who had regularly attended SAS mission debriefs, then said he had seen photographs where the same AK47 was placed next to different Afghan corpses.

Nonetheless, Neal closed down the Northmoor investigation in July 2019. No charges had been brought against any SAS soldier. He left the RMP just three days later and would become the chief inspector of borders and immigration, earning £130,000 a year.

That summer Johnny Mercer MP was appointed veterans' minister and given the task of introducing a law to give British soldiers protection from prosecution.

While supporting the bill, Mercer also believed soldiers should be brought to book if there was genuine evidence of war crimes. A special forces veteran of the Afghan war, Mercer had heard stories about the SAS killing unarmed people. He was also friends with an SBS soldier who claimed he had been asked to carry a weapon to plant on corpses when he worked alongside the SAS in Afghanistan. The soldier had refused.

Mercer was concerned by the closure of Northmoor and gained permission from Ben Wallace, the defence secretary at the time, to get to the bottom of what had happened. He says Carleton-Smith, who was now chief of the general staff and the de facto head of the army, assured him the allegations were of no substance.

But the explanations for the killings did not ring true to Mercer. "To suggest that an individual, who knows the game is up, then pulls out a grenade or steps behind a curtain and pulls out a weapon and starts taking on an entire sub-unit 14 times is not plausible," he later told the Afghan war crimes inquiry. "I've never seen that behaviour myself, I've never heard of that behaviour myself, and to be asked to believe it time and again is, frankly, a bit of an insult to those of us who operated in the same way."

He found the lack of footage from the missions particularly suspicious. Filming the night raids, he said, was a statutory requirement and the operations would not be given approval if video was unavailable.

Mercer raised his concerns with Ryan, the MoD's director of judicial engagement. However, Ryan later edited the minutes of their conversation to tone down the minister's comments.

"Among the challenges that we share is the need to protect ministers and the department from the perils of disclosure," Ryan wrote in an email explaining the edits. "Given the ongoing and prospective legal challenges on a wide range of issues, it is quite possible that ministerial records will be put into the public domain. So bland is best."

In the end, Mercer decided to adopt the MoD position and made a statement in the House of Commons in January 2020 denying that the SAS had operated death squads.

He was then furious when he read an article in The Sunday Times a few months later revealing that his department had disclosed emails — which he had been previously unaware of — to the High Court showing that the SAS's own commanders believed the killings were illegal at the time.

In a letter to Wallace, Mercer asked to correct the record in parliament by withdrawing his statement. He never did and says Wallace talked him out of it.

[...]

Last week The Sunday Times contacted the soldiers and civil servants mentioned in this article. Most declined to comment and Page was uncontactable. Carleton-Smith said that "none of my senior commanders expressed any concerns to me or produced any evidence of unlawful killings in Afghanistan" before and during his tenure as director of special forces.

An MoD spokeswoman said: "It is not appropriate for us to comment on allegations which may be within the scope of the statutory inquiry."

Mercer gave evidence to the SAS inquiry but refused to hand over the names of the soldiers who told him about the regiment's murders and use of drop weapons. He is challenging an order from the inquiry judge to reveal the names and could face a possible prison sentence.

Since becoming veterans' minister, Mercer has been working to find homes in the UK for the Afghan special forces soldiers who served alongside the SAS. Their lives are under threat because of the Taliban control over their country.

Mercer says the Afghan soldiers have confirmed his "worst fears" by providing first-hand witness testimony of how the SAS killed unarmed men and children after they had been detained. The minister's verdict on the SAS soldiers is damning. "They're criminals that I have no traction with," he told the inquiry.

What's also striking to me is the failing upwards/moving sideways within institutions - again in the UK those sort of appointments are not really in the gift of politicians, it's an internal process within the institutions themselves. And I find the institutional reaction from within the army, special forces and MoD very alarming - if, sadly, not entirely surprising.

#9

Off the Record / Re: Israel-Hamas War 2023

Last post by Eddie Teach - Today at 12:44:03 PM

I think part of those numbers is that we non-believers stop being Protestants and being counted in the stats.

#10

Off the Record / Re: Israel-Hamas War 2023

Last post by HVC - Today at 12:36:53 PM

Jews for Jesus!