According to many modern translations, the chief priests and scribes were anxious to arrest Jesus, but not “during the feast, lest there be a tumult of the people” (Mark ch14 v2, Matthew ch26 v5). The AV modifies it by adding a supplementary word; “on the feast day.  These translations give the impression that they wanted to avoid action during a period of time. This in turn gives rise to the idea that they changed their minds when Judas showed them how the arrest could be made in the middle of this period.
 
However, I think this idea is a misunderstanding, based on a mistranslation.
 
The Greek expression translated as “during the feast” is EN TE HEORTE. But EN is the equivalent of the English “In” and has a wider range of meanings than “during”. That is why the AV translates “on” and is obliged to add “day” to make it more idiomatic in English speech. I’m going to suggest, though, that HEORTE is not a period of time but a location.
 
Let’s take a similar expression in modern English; “At the carnival”. The best-known carnival in the world is surely the Brazilian “Carnavale” (their spelling wanders further away from the Latin CARNI VALE, “farewell to flesh). The most recent  Carnavale was held on February 9th-14th 2024. But can we say that something is happening “at the carnival” just because it is happening during that time period? Surely a man can’t truly say that he is “in the carnival” or “at the carnival” unless he’s out there on the streets. If he’s hiding out in a back street hotel room, then he’s evading the carnival, not being part of it. “At the carnival” is as much about location as it is about time.
 
So “not at the feast” could be understood as “not in the streets, in the middle of the crowds which have gathered for the feast”. And that’s exactly how Luke seems to take it. His paraphrase is that Judas offered them a chance to capture Jesus “in the absence of the multitude” (Luke ch22 v6). While in John, the chief priests and Pharisees are giving orders that “if anyone knew where [Jesus} was, he should let them know, so that they might arrest him” (John ch11v57). This too is about “away from the crowds”.
 
So Judas was, in fact, offering the authorities what they had wanted from the beginning, namely a way to arrest Jesus without interference, because it would be “not in the middle of the feast-crowds”.

“And Peter said to Jesus, ‘Lord, it is well that we are here; if you wish, I will make three booths here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah” (Matthew ch17 v4).
 
I was reminded of this episode recently by a wrong-headed interpretation of it found in Toynbee’s “Study of History”. I like Toynbee. I am carefully reading through this work for the fourth time. But his enthusiasm for his case sometimes moves him to build it upon inaccurate details, and this is one of them.
 
He is offering examples of Violent and Gentle reactions to the disintegrations of civilisations. He counts Peter initially as an example of the violent tendency, partly because of the ear-cutting incident at Gethsemane, and partly because of the declaration just quoted. He claims that Peter took the appearance of Elijah and Moses as the signal for a war of liberation, “proposing to build on the spot the nucleus of a camp of the kind that the Theudases and Judases of Galilee were wont to establish in the wilderness during the brief interval of grace before the Roman authorities received intelligence of their activities and sent out a flying column of troops to disperse them” (Volume V, p393, if you want to look it up).
 
Commentaries don’t always do better. One found on my bookshelves, ignoring the wording of the remark, suggests that Peter wanted to build shelters for the three disciples, being the ones who would need shelter, so that they could stay on the mountain longer. Most commentators discover an allusion to the annual Feast of Tabernacles, often called “Feast of Booths” in modern times. The RSV translation implies the same assumption.
 
But I suggest that Peter was not thinking of the annual feast at all, but of the original Tabernacle, the one established by Moses in order to meet with God. The word used by Peter (SKENE) is the same word used in Hebrews ch9 for the original Tabernacle.
 
I think he was remembering that the Tabernacle had been erected originally so that Moses could speak with God. Seeing Jesus, Moses and Elijah together, it occurred to him, in his understandably muddled state of mind, that they might need one each. Hence the proposal.

Hello, I hail from AboveTopSecret forum.

The ATS hacking incident barred me from retrieving my original account (I didn't bother visiting the discord group), and subsequently, I was locked out of my 2nd account for no reason.

I heard rumors that the end of the site may come soon so I made an account on here in advance (and I'm considering, against my better judgment, making one on another refuge site). During my time on ATS, I never made any topics, I preferred to only react to other people's remarks.

But the urgency of our situation compels me to step out with an announcement. 
I come bearing a message on behalf of a friend, who was also locked out of his 2nd account. Setting aside his religious agenda, I would like to focus more on the political side of things, it seems he foresaw a possible variation of the recent terror attack in Moscow as early as February 13, 2023: https://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thr...id26887123

I will reproduce some of it here:

WanderingMrM Wrote:And I heard many voices, laughter and songs, I saw dances and foods... I heard many voices, screams and panic, there were kids and women crying. Smoke filled the once happy area and when I barely stood up, past all the ringing and chaos I managed to see and realize it was some sort of bomb that went off... 
So, ladies and gentlemen, we got multiple terrorist attacks it seems planned either on Russian territory or European. The time placement I would say was between April-July based on the sort of weather I was experiencing, but the masses of people gathered definitely reminds me of some sort of European festival or market, a Russian festival or as they call Yarmarka, or an American-like festival. 
In regards to those who were involved all I can say is that the multiple channels the TV was cycling through said they had ties to ISIS and Al-Qaeda. I then sat there and thought why specifically "ISIS and Al-Qaeda" didn't those guys fall off the radar? and No longer really did anything? 
And that is when it happened, everything around me went silent as I sat there looking through the corridor with people being treated, some screaming, some covered in blood and have their leg/legs or arm/arms missing... I said to myself "Wait... Did Americans do this?" and my body instantly became cold from the shock of the realization.

WanderingMrM Wrote:Either in coming few days, or it will be kept silent due to a mass reveal by Putin to rise up Russians and do an entire national mobilisation. If you have anyone in Europe especially in France around time of Olympic games tell them to stay away. If this is a timeline scenario, something might be planned for France.

A very strong and well spoken opening statement

Quote:In a recent hearing, Tony Bobulinski took aim at Jamie Raskin and Dan Goldman, accusing them of perpetuating lies across various media platforms. The hearing, convened by the House Oversight Committee amidst a Republican-led investigation, delved into allegations surrounding the business dealings of Joe and Hunter Biden. Testimony was provided by former associates of Hunter Biden, including Lev Parnas, once linked to Rudy Giuliani. Tony Bobulinski's testimony focused on purported connections between the Bidens and business ventures in China and Russia, suggesting their involvement in influence peddling. He claimed firsthand encounters with the Bidens in 2017, portraying them as actively engaged participants in the alleged dealings.

LOL

Yes, the Democrat Fascist are going full "RETARD". They want to censor anything they don't like that they are willing to blatantly overturn the 1st amendment. Funny, 10 years ago conservatives were telling leftists that they would need the 2nd to protect the 1st. Now those same idiots are the ones wanting to destroy the 1st along with the 2nd.

As expected. 

MSNBC legal analyst says First Amendment makes US ‘vulnerable,’ calls for ‘common sense’ speech restrictions

Quote:MSNBC legal analyst Barbara McQuade argued Monday that the United States’ “deep commitment to free speech” makes Americans uniquely susceptible to disinformation campaigns.



McQuade, a University of Michigan law professor, went on “The Rachel Maddow Show” to promote her new book, “Attack from Within: How Disinformation is Sabotaging America.” She said her “goal” with the book was to spark a “national conversation about truth and our commitment to it.” 
She added, “I hope that by dissecting it, explaining it, and educating the public, we can all see disinformation for what it is so that we can begin to push back against it.”
When asked by host Rachel Maddow whether America is just as susceptible to disinformation as other countries, McQuade argued that it is even more vulnerable.

“Actually, Rachel, I think we’re more susceptible to it than other countries, and that’s because some of our greatest strengths can also be our Achilles Heel,” McQuade said. “So, for example, our deep commitment to free speech in our First Amendment. It is a cherished right. It’s an important right in democracy, and nobody wants to get rid of it, but it makes us vulnerable to claims [that] anything we want to do related to speech is censorship.”

She argued, “Of course, the Supreme Court has held that all fundamental rights, even the right to free speech, can be limited as long as there is a compelling governmental interest and the restriction is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest. But I think any time someone tries to do anything that might limit free speech, people claim censorship.”

McQuade held up as an example this week’s Supreme Court cases regarding state laws about how social media platforms moderate content.


“We need to have a conversation and common-sense solutions to these things,” she said. “Instead, we throw out terms like ‘censorship,’ call each other names, use labels and retreat to our opposite sides. We need to be pragmatic and come up with real solutions.”

“But, it is, I think, one of the things that makes America particularly vulnerable to disinformation,” she concluded.

Maddow praised the book’s arguments and touted McQuade’s work as a “real public service and a pleasure.”

We just get used to the land-bridge theory and then another idea appears to suggest
Fred Flintstone followed the white stuff -but from the east to the west.

Quote:Archaeologists stunned by theory that ancient Europeans arrived in Americas

Hotly contended, the hypothesis proposes that Europeans made the
arduous sea journey thousands of years ago before anyone else.

'The most widely accepted theory goes that the peopling of the Americas began during
the Paleolithic period when hunter-gatherers entered North America from Siberia.

Proponents of this argument say they travelled across the Bering Sea which was at that
time a land bridge, its waters having receded because of the Ice Age. These people came
into what is today known as Alaska and, over thousands of years, spread down and
throughout the entirety of the Americas.

There is, however, another altogether more controversial theory that places the people who
reached the Americas not from Siberia but from Europe. The Solutrean hypothesis insists
that these ancient people travelled along pack ice in the Atlantic Ocean on primitive boats,
and claims to have the evidence to prove it.

According to the hypothesis, 21,000 years ago, a group of people from the Solutré region of
France, a group known for their unique toolmaking technique.

Bruce Bradley and Dennis Stanford, the modern-day proponents of the hypothesis, say once
these European people made it to North America, their toolmaking method made its way
around the continent and provided the basis for the spread of Clovis toolmaking technology,
found all around the continent.

This is the premise in which the hypothesis is surrounded: that Clovis and Solutrean technologies
are strikingly similar and potential evidence that the former came from the latter. Originally
proposed in the 1970s, it didn't become really popular until the 2010s, when Stanford of the
Smithsonian Institute and Bradley of the University of Exeter came across it.

Solutrean culture comes from present-day France, Spain, and Portugal, and has been dated
to between 17,000 and 21,000 years ago. Their tools and Clovis tools found in the likes of
New Mexico share common features. Their pointed tops are thin and bifacial, and both use
the "outrepassé", or overshot flaking technique. This particular technique reduces the thickness
of a biface without reducing its width.

Supporters further point to the presence of a specific type of DNA — haplogroup X2 — shared
by those in Europe and those in North America, though this line of argument has been contended
with some experts pointing to the fact that it was part of the gene pool of a single Native American
founding population not from Europe.



Other arguments dismiss the hypothesis, including from one scientist who has described it is
"scientifically implausible". Jennifer Raff, a geneticist, writing for The Guardian in 2018, said it
"suggests a European origin for the peoples who made the Clovis tools, the first recognised
stone tool tradition in the Americas"...'

Here they go again, another big tech Antitrust suit.

The DOJ along with New Jersey, Arizona, Calif, Washington D.C., Connecticut, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Tennessee, Vermont, Wisconsin. Complaint goes all the way back to the Apple iPod.

Quote:Apple’s Broad-Based, Exclusionary Conduct Makes It Harder for Americans to Switch Smartphones, Undermines Innovation for Apps, Products, and Services, and Imposes Extraordinary Costs on Developers, Businesses, and Consumers

The Justice Department, joined by 16 other state and district attorneys general, filed a civil antitrust lawsuit against Apple for monopolization or attempted monopolization of smartphone markets in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act.

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleges that Apple illegally maintains a monopoly over smartphones by selectively imposing contractual restrictions on, and withholding critical access points from, developers. Apple undermines apps, products, and services that would otherwise make users less reliant on the iPhone, promote interoperability, and lower costs for consumers and developers. Apple exercises its monopoly power to extract more money from consumers, developers, content creators, artists, publishers, small businesses, and merchants, among others. Through this monopolization lawsuit, the Justice Department and state Attorneys General are seeking relief to restore competition to these vital markets on behalf of the American public.

“Consumers should not have to pay higher prices because companies violate the antitrust laws,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “We allege that Apple has maintained monopoly power in the smartphone market, not simply by staying ahead of the competition on the merits, but by violating federal antitrust law. If left unchallenged, Apple will only continue to strengthen its smartphone monopoly. The Justice Department will vigorously enforce antitrust laws that protect consumers from higher prices and fewer choices. That is the Justice Department’s legal obligation and what the American people expect and deserve.”

“No matter how powerful, no matter how prominent, no matter how popular — no company is above the law,” said Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. “Through today’s action, we reaffirm our unwavering commitment to that principle.”

“When corporations engage in anticompetitive conduct, the American people and our economy suffer,” said Acting Associate Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer. “Today’s action against Apple sends a strong signal to those seeking to box out competitors and stifle innovation — that the Justice Department is committed to using every tool available to advance economic justice and root out anticompetitive practices, wherever they arise.”

“For years, Apple responded to competitive threats by imposing a series of “Whac-A-Mole” contractual rules and restrictions that have allowed Apple to extract higher prices from consumers, impose higher fees on developers and creators, and to throttle competitive alternatives from rival technologies,” said Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division. “Today’s lawsuit seeks to hold Apple accountable and ensure it cannot deploy the same, unlawful playbook in other vital markets.”

As alleged in the complaint, Apple has monopoly power in the smartphone and performance smartphones markets, and it uses its control over the iPhone to engage in a broad, sustained, and illegal course of conduct. This anticompetitive behavior is designed to maintain Apple’s monopoly power while extracting as much revenue as possible. The complaint alleges that Apple’s anticompetitive course of conduct has taken several forms, many of which continue to evolve today, including:

• Blocking Innovative Super Apps. Apple has disrupted the growth of apps with broad functionality that would make it easier for consumers to switch between competing smartphone platforms.
  
• Suppressing Mobile Cloud Streaming Services. Apple has blocked the development of cloud-streaming apps and services that would allow consumers to enjoy high-quality video games and other cloud-based applications without having to pay for expensive smartphone hardware.
  
• Excluding Cross-Platform Messaging Apps. Apple has made the quality of cross-platform messaging worse, less innovative, and less secure for users so that its customers have to keep buying iPhones.
  
• Diminishing the Functionality of Non-Apple Smartwatches. Apple has limited the functionality of third-party smartwatches so that users who purchase the Apple Watch face substantial out-of-pocket costs if they do not keep buying iPhones.
  
• Limiting Third Party Digital Wallets. Apple has prevented third-party apps from offering tap-to-pay functionality, inhibiting the creation of cross-platform third-party digital wallets.
  

The complaint also alleges that Apple’s conduct extends beyond these examples, affecting web browsers, video communication, news subscriptions, entertainment, automotive services, advertising, location services, and more. Apple has every incentive to extend and expand its course of conduct to acquire and maintain power over next-frontier devices and technologies.

For over a century, the Department has enforced the antitrust laws against illegal monopolies, deploying the Sherman Act to unfetter markets and restore competition. As alleged in the complaint, the Department is seeking equitable relief on behalf of the American public to redress Apple’s long-running, pervasive anticompetitive conduct.

Apple Inc. is a publicly traded company incorporated in California and headquartered in Cupertino, California. In fiscal year 2023, Apple generated annual net revenues of $383 billion and net income of $97 billion. Apple’s net income exceeds any other company in the Fortune 500 and the gross domestic products of more than 100 countries.

apple_file_stamped_complaint_3.21.24.pdf

My sister-in-law is a "Resident Alien" fan. I will admit that I did not give octopi much thought until watching this show with her, and having this video show up in my feed. I think maybe we should have a closer look at the octopus.




Now I find them not just fascinating, But I have to ask myself, what if they too, over time, have came out of the water? I mean, really came out of the water.

I get a bunch of garbage in my Feed, but sometimes I luck up on a jewel. I ran across this in my Feed this morning and I have to admit that it got the gears to turning.

This video tries to pass of a lot of information in a short amount of time. It stirs up a ton of questions, because the subject is very complex.

I could not get pass just how such large number of haplogroups show up through migration. I would think that war and combat had a lot to do with it.

In order for there to be such a large number of breakaways, there had to be others with whom the migrants mated. But it seems that those breakaways were a part of the original groups at one time.

While it is not odd that those newer migrants, would eventually create their own haplogroups. I just don't see that occurring in such large numbers. Most tribes do not welcome strange males. They will kill them, run them off, or enslave them. So for that much mating to be going on, it seems that war, rape and pillaging, may have been a predominating factor.

The spoils of war, or the remnants of war. It is almost Biblical.

Just a thought.

Well, TikTok showed criminals how to steal Kia's so I guess this is the next best thing.... How to use Progressive's laws to steal American's houses. Video at link... (Note, I don't speak Spanish so not sure exactly what he is saying)

https://twitter.com/CollinRugg/status/17...5214251441

Quote:NEW: TikToker is going viral by telling illegal immigrants how to "invade" homes in America thanks to progressive squatting laws

Remarkable.

"We can invade a house in the USA, what do you think about this new law?" a video from one TikTok user read.

The man said he has African friends who have successfully taken over 7 homes thanks to squatting laws.

"My African friends have told me that they have already taken about 7 homes."