Muslime partner

Desperately need help - divorce/adultery/remarriage and satanic attack/ trap

2020.10.27 17:21 helpsaveme2020 Desperately need help - divorce/adultery/remarriage and satanic attack/ trap

Please help me. I am in, have been in an incredibly terrifying and distressing situation that I cannot answer in theologically nor in real world terms in light of my experience and I am in terror that I have committed the unforgivable sin. There are so many layers to this and so much detail/ darkness that I will try to simplify to its key parts.
I grew up Anglican, left the church at 18y and followed my own wicked ways. Had great success in worldly terms, married a muslim lady, destroyed the marriage through adultery, she divorced me under civil, perhaps not Islamic law, and disappeared with our son once she managed to gain sole custody. During this time I also invented and developed something valuable while continuing a (demonic) relationship with the girl from the affair who was my business partner and found out too much about some of the real world and occult truths of the satanic system as they tried to make me a witting part. My life was destroyed when I fought back in the most terrifying ways and I still not do know the truth about what has happened. It was only after the below that I turned to God and realised the truth that is in Christ Jesus.
In 2017, I met an incredible young woman who I met in Ireland where I was living and who to me was 'an angel of light' at a time when I had been going through extreme attack over the last few years in real world and spiritual terms by the kingdom of darkness (below). She was from USA, an adoptee with a lifelong history of trauma and abuse. We had a deeply loving relationship, were joyously happy and she was healing with a trauma cycle that was obviously emotional/ psychological. We married in Nov. 10 Days after we married, she suddenly 'changed' in every respect imaginable - from physical features, bone structure, muscular-skeletal etc to personality and at the same time, I had an overwhelming sense/ knowledge of death/ satan and was in terror. From that point, pure satanic torment ensued, the trauma cycle became demonic not human, and to cut a long story short, over the last 3y, a cycle of fleeing in terror, returning in hope that something so horrific couldn't be true, worsening torment and demonic manifestations, commentary on my progressive spiritual destruction at the hands of a 'lie'. To me, it seems that either a girl was killed/ replaced or that this is either nephilim (those who cause others to fall) or something from end times - the abomination of desolation/ beast. The catholic priest thinks it must be oppression/ possession, has verified objective evidence of preternatural anomalies. Most pastors cannot comprehend the thinks that I have told them as while the Bible tells us of the reality of the devil and the demonic, not many outside of the catholic church seem to have experience in dealing with it.
I don't know if it was a snare/ trap from satan - whatever the truth, witchcraft (i was cursed by my ex-wife and her mom), or as it seems to me an occult horror used by the satanic kingdom to control, and/ or whether it has literally been the cycle of desire/ leading to sin/ conception in full/ (spiritual) death and my destruction.
During this time I had some extreme experiences, one in which a woman who struggles with the occult became completely possessed by the devil - it was scary, but 'get back from me satan' worked and she transfigured back after a few seconds of the most terrifying presence and a couple in which I can only describe as similar to e.g. St Gemma, in which I would go to see a local pastor and it would be the devil - no idea how - but I couldn't bring myself to do the same in that instance. However, the malevolent presence, cruelty and inconsistency with the real pastor and tormenting use of scripture or 'I want to test your faith' etc was definitely 100% not the pastor!
I have been caught in horror between being unable to love properly as there is another kind of being there that torments me continually and to be a husband as I should/ otherwise would as it/ she has always alluded to/ emphasized that she is not the original girl, and being unable to flee and cut all ties as it is an horror too great for the mind or soul to bear and if she is my wife and it is preternatural differences from demons, oppressions and she needs to be delivered as the catholic priest tells me then I am not in rightstanding with God if I am not performing my role as a husband. However, while this seems fine at face value, it entirely negates the very real experience that I have of being with something that has literally revealed itself, and manifested frequently, as being of satan and so I have knowingly been in pursuit of, in submission to, and even having sexual relations with until I stopped. Nothing seems human, genuine and I have felt that I am lying to God because the truth that I know is that a girl has disappeared and something else taken her place, but if I fail to love and break another marriage then I am unrighteous in the eyes of everyone etc. It is a perfect trap and directly of the devil.
What is my sin? If I am knowingly doing something that is somehow from the enemy then that has to be sin? But an Anglican priest that I correspond with tells me this is a divine cruelty that could not exist and that I should love her even if I think its not her (even though she/ it has told me its satan/ a lie/ not that girl) and a kind Baptist pastor has told me to forget all the bad stuff and just trust the Bible - but the Bible tells us that the devil and his snares are real and that we are lost if we reject Christ. And so I just do not know what I am meant to do. To everyone else it seems unrighteous in the way I am not being husband, but when I am with a being that makes no pretense around me alone and mocks me, tempts me if I try to fast/ pray, torments me, inflicts soul wounds and accuses me/ unleashes fury on me if I will not obey its interpretation of scripture or if I want to leave. Totally different to the kind, warm, soft evangelising girl that I met who was super intelligent and would have constructive discussion, rational argument.
I cannot describe the state of desolation and despair that I have been in, and find myself totally numb, apathetic and questioning how God can be so cruel whatever the truth.
Please help.
submitted by helpsaveme2020 to TrueChristian [link] [comments]


2020.10.27 09:41 UltraInstinctBeerus Easy good deed of the day (Day 250)

250. The Virtues of Reciting Tasbih at-I-Fatima

A well-known Tradition of the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) has it that the Prophet's (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) beloved daughter (and Ali's (Ra) wife), Fatima (Ra), used to perform all the domestic duties with her own hands. She had even to draw water from the well and to carry it home and to grind the corn in the millstone.
One day she begged the Prophet (Sallallahu AlaihiWasallam) to provide her with a domestic servant upon which the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) observed, "I will tell you of something that will serve you better than a domestic servant. Recite Subhaan-Allaah 33 times, Alhamdulillaah 33 times, and AllahuAkbar 34 times after each Salaah and on retiring to bed. This will be of greater value to you than a servant." [MishkatP209 V1 Sahih Muslim]
Another Tradition says, "Whoever will recite after each Salaah 33 times Subhaa-nallaah, 33 times Alhamdulillaah, and 34 times AllahuAkbar, and, at the end of it, the Kalima of ‘Laa ilaaha illal laahu wahdahu laasharika lahu lahul mulku wa-lahul hamdu wa huwa alaa kulli shay-in qadeer’. (There is no Allah but one Allah. He is alone. No partner hath. He Him belongs sovereignty and unto Him belongs Praise and He is all-Powerful) all his sins will be forgiven even if they be as profuse as the foam of the sea."
Even more easy good deeds you can do:
https://www.reddit.com/islam/comments/f6xkuh/40_good_deeds_you_can_do_everyday/
submitted by UltraInstinctBeerus to islam [link] [comments]


2020.10.27 07:19 Anarchist-Dajjal Let's talk about the outrage caused by the French President's statements.

Just wanted to get something off my chest so...
Okay, hear me out as I've got a lot of things going on in my head. As I go through posts calling for France's destruction on social media platforms, I keep reminding myself that there's a huge market for Muslim Outrage in the world. People on the far side of the opposite ideology deliberately do such things because they know it would generate a huge outrage amongst Muslims and baiting them to get their worse reaction possible, i.e call for the heads of the culprits, demanding the expulsion of the ambassador, that further reinforces their narrative of painting Islam and Muslims in a bad light. And the fact that our people keep taking the bait is just absurd and infuriating to me.
After going through Macron's statements several times, I fail to see the reason why are we so offended by them. Radical Islamists are indeed a problem, and who knows that better than us. We live in a country that idolizes clod-blooded Murderers like Mumtaz Qadri, Khalid Khan. The fact that an overwhelming majority in this Country justifies what happened to that School Teacher in broad daylight in the French Capital, and considers the murderer a hero further reinforces Macron's statement regarding Islam being in crisis, I think.
As far as the calls for the boycott of French Products are concerned, the herd mentality is as strong as ever. People are sharing names and logos of companies that have nothing to do with France, and their entire operation is based in Pakistan. What's the fault of our local distributors, Partners, License holder, manufacturers, franchisee, etc who spent their entire fortune over the course of many years to establish their business here in Pakistan? What would happen to the thousands that are employed because of these brands? Do these people really think?
submitted by Anarchist-Dajjal to pakistan [link] [comments]


2020.10.27 07:14 KellinQuinn__ S.ConRes.4: Indian Relations and Bilateral Ties Resolution

S.Con. Res. XXXX

Indian Relations and Bilateral Ties Resolution

A Resolution

to Affirm the United States of America’s Relations and Bilateral Ties with the Republic of India

Whereas the Southeast of Asia is increasingly a volatile and conflict-prone region,
Whereas India has demonstrated a commitment to effective leadership and peace in the region,
Whereas the Republic of India is better suited to take the role of the United States of America’s key ally in the region than current partners,
Whereas the Republic of India is widely recognized to be an ascendant power on the global stage,
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That Congress—
(1) Approves a policy of adherence to a Doctrine—
(a) To preserve and promote close, extensive, and friendly commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people of the Republic of India;
(b) to declare that peace and stability in the Indian Subcontinent are in the political, security, and economic interests of the United States, and are matters of international importance and concern;
(c)to consider any effort to affect the development of the Republic of India by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Indian Subcontinent and of the highest concern to the United States;
(d) to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion from any nation that would jeopardize the social, economic, or security systems of the people of the Republic of India;
(e) to prioritize the pursuit of a peaceful and bilateral end to the Kashmir territorial conflict;
(2) Calls upon the Government of the Republic of India to—
(a) protect values of secularism and religious freedom in the Republic of India, especially with regards to the rights of Christians and Muslims;
(b) take a larger role in the protection of peace and stability in the Southeast Asian region;
(c) Increase defense spending levels to 3 percent of Gross Domestic Product with the additional spending to be allocated primarily towards;
(i) Expanding Indian cyberwarfare and counter-cyberterrorism capabilities;
(ii) supporting increased Indo-American joint military exercises in Southeast Asia, including but not limited to naval exercises in the Bay of Bengal, the Indian Ocean, and the Arabian Sea;
(d) actively seek, with greater determination, cordial relations with the Islamic Republic of Pakistan;
(e) partially denuclearize and aid in cooling down nuclear tensions in the region;
(f) pursue a deregulated and minimal-tariff approach to imports from the United States of America to the Republic of India;
(g) Promote free markets and entrepreneurship, and foster a keen business sense in their members
(h) support civil society organizations and media organizations working to enhance transparency and accountability in the use of state resources;
(i) defend and expand workers’ rights, specifically the right to strike and bargain;
(j) Promote American cultural figures including but not limited to authors, poets, musicians, and intellectuals;
(3) Calls upon Indian political parties to—
(a) Campaign on policies that favor strong relations with the United States of America;
(b) Promote secularism in their ranks and strive towards cultural, racial, caste, and gender equality;
(c) Promote free markets and entrepreneurship, and foster a keen business sense in their members;
(4) Recommends to the United Nations—
(a) A permanent non-veto seat at the United Nations Security Council for the Republic of India to occupy;
(b) the passage of a unanimous resolution of gratitude towards the Republic of India for remaining consistent and generous in their supply of Indian Military troops towards United Nations Peacekeeping operations around the world; and,
(5) Approves of an American diplomatic intervention in order to resolve the Kashmir territorial conflict between the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Republic of India.
This legislation is authored and sponsored by Senator Adithyansoccer (R-DX) and is cosponsored in the House of Representatives by Speaker of the House Skiboy625 (D-LN-2), Rep. Pik_09 (R-DX-1), Rep. IcyHelicopter (R-US), Rep. SELDOM237 (R-US), Rep. brihimia (D-DX-4), Rep. Nazbol909 (D-LN-4), and Rep.Greejatus (R-US), and in the Senate by Senate Minority Leader Zurikurta (C-SR), Sen. DDYT (R-LN), Sen. Gunnz011(C-AC), and Sen. Polkadot48 (D-CH)
submitted by KellinQuinn__ to ModelUSGov [link] [comments]


2020.10.27 04:49 Fenrir555 [NEWS] The Left

The Popular Front's early days had been widely controlled by the Left wing of itself. In its very early days, it was controlled mostly by socialists and social democrats that established a small welfare state within Khorog and nearby suburban regions. While this was by no means uninterrupted, this would continue as the now-empowered PRASP and its junior coalition partner the DMPG were the ones who initiated official contact with other states and laid the foundations for the Guardianship as a proper nation. The far left quickly found itself hugely unpopular within the Guardianship as it found itself at war with the repressive CPCA and the PWPP scandal. Meanwhile, within the ex-Islamic Emirate and Persian territories, leftists were actively oppressed and silenced. This has lead to a regional divide within the Guardianship, with the Central Asian regions heavily preferring the more Liberal candidates while the further left wing candidates finding more luck in Afghanistan and Iran.
The People's Radical Alliance of Social Progress (PRASP) survived the drastic internal changes of the Popular Front, having been a party that had enjoyed large scale success. Having slowly transitioned to a big-tent construct akin to the CDP on the right wing due to the banning of PWPP and the DMPG slowly being drained of members, it found itself also ailing from the lack of clear progress and the dominance of the right wing in the past few years. As the election cycle came to an end and the internal factions began to coalesce, it became clear that PRASP was returning to its more traditional roots. Much of the liberal, more centrist members of PRASP found homes elsewhere and allowed its more progressive leaning leaders to pull its policies in the same direction. While it's more radical members would also find themselves leaving for more welcoming factions, it still found itself more akin to when it was leading the coalition that brought the Guardianship out of obscurity. It advocates for a large central government with extensive social networks of support paid for by high taxes and tariffs on foreign trade. It actively supports the Guardianship's current foreign policies, and is one of the more pro-active factions when it comes to enforcing the social liberalization the Guardianship has enacted, especially in places like the old Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Most of its support comes from the urban elite in old CPCA territories and regions within Iran.
The National Freedom Union (NFU) is a faction that has arisen mostly around the liberalization of both the country and its nearby regions. Compromised mostly of prominent leaders within the core of the Guardianship along with pockets of support in its other regions, it aims to "formally and informally unify the nation under its core values, and continue to do so beyond our borders." More specifically, the faction wants to push for hard liberalization and unification of the disparate groups within the Guardianship under the ideals of things like secularism, womens' rights, free market economics, and others. It also wants to, in a similar vein, aggressively enforce those concepts on "key regions" to rid places of authoritarianism and repressive policies.
The People's Union of Workers and Laborers (PUWL) is made up of candidates within mostly Iran and, to a certain extent, Afghanistan. They are attempting to represent the lower portions of society within those regions that now have a voice in political procedures and are hotbeds of leftist political thought. Unsurprisingly socialist, they exist on the left edge of PRASP. Aiming to create a similar welfare state but with the intention of cutting the largest corporations in the country and making money of the remnants to pay for it. Seeing as much of Iran and Afghanistan remain noticeably poorer than regions like Tajikistan, they lack any comprehensive foreign policy and instead argue that resources used outside the Guardianship are hypocritical at best when these poor regions continue to exist.
League of Industrial Cooperation (LIO) is another far-left party that is mostly concentrated around the territories that encountered combat between the Ayatollah of Persia and the Guardianship before the transitional period and then the Guardianship's direct intervention. A fairly undeveloped region based around industrial production that experienced the most combat of Iran, the candidates from this region are focused on the economic and political structure of the Popular Front. They argue for heavy subsidies of nationally important industries to assist the development of underdeveloped regions. Similarly, they wish to severely cut down on the industrial and fuel-based corporations that own large portions of a number of key industry market shares, and enforce heavy taxes on both income and businesses.
The Party For Social Progression and Coordination (PSPC) lobbies for continued "social progress" and further liberalization of Guardianship society. Compared to other left wing parties, it tends to advocate for less taxes and larger budgetary considerations towards things like infrastructure, education, and more agrarian aspects of the economy, believing it to be an effective way of changing the more rural economy of Afghanistan. It's members tend to be from old CPCA territories and Afghanistan.
The League of Democratic Deputies (LDD) is a faction centered around the strategy of gathering the votes of those fearful of those that exist on the edges. Sitting on the very middle of the spectrum, they are allies of the business world. Outside of grandstanding along the generalized democratic ideals of the Guardianship, they mostly push for light but existent regulation of private markets and moderate income taxes. Otherwise, they tend to tap around specific policies and often make changes based off what seems to be most popular.
The Progress and Peace Movement (PPM) is a small, focused faction that is strongly anti-war and anti-industry. While not as strongly anti-business as some other parties on the left, some of their prominent members represent communities that are agrarian in nature and dislike the industrial giants that dominate the Guardianship's economy. These candidates tend to come from the non-Emirate Afghan territories, and many of their members are proudly Muslim as well.
The Revitalization and Reform Initiative (RRI) is mostly a branch-off party of the old DMPG and some fringe members of PRASP. Preaching a different platform than many others on the left, they have gathered proponents because of their powerful pro-business stance. While they argue on behalf of corporations and the business world, they also argue for a large and powerful central government. Arguing for more cooperation between the two sectors, they believe that with high taxes but with pro-business legislation and foreign policy the Guardianship can best exist as a proponent of democracy and liberalism. This party is most powerful in the core of the Guardianship, and in some portions of the old CPCA territory.
submitted by Fenrir555 to PostWorldPowers [link] [comments]


2020.10.27 02:23 curious_1512 interfaith marriage

I have good respect for inter religion marriages and I understand the parents point of view also when they want their kin to get married in same religion/culture , considering 1 less conflict is always good thing to have in couples But is it true that in Muslims/Islam , if your son is getting married to a non-Muslim , it is considered as a trophy considering their work towards conversion whereas daughter getting married in another faith is BIG NO-NO ( until unless other partner accept Islam). ...
Any one experienced same or similar
submitted by curious_1512 to exmuslim [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 23:06 John_Charles_Fremont /r/neoliberal elects the American Presidents - Part 55, Obama v Romney in 2012

Previous editions:
(All strawpoll results counted as of the next post made)
Part 1, Adams v Jefferson in 1796 - Adams wins with 68% of the vote
Part 2, Adams v Jefferson in 1800 - Jefferson wins with 58% of the vote
Part 3, Jefferson v Pinckney in 1804 - Jefferson wins with 57% of the vote
Part 4, Madison v Pinckney (with George Clinton protest) in 1808 - Pinckney wins with 45% of the vote
Part 5, Madison v (DeWitt) Clinton in 1812 - Clinton wins with 80% of the vote
Part 6, Monroe v King in 1816 - Monroe wins with 51% of the vote
Part 7, Monroe and an Era of Meta Feelings in 1820 - Monroe wins with 100% of the vote
Part 8, Democratic-Republican Thunderdome in 1824 - Adams wins with 55% of the vote
Part 9, Adams v Jackson in 1828 - Adams wins with 94% of the vote
Part 10, Jackson v Clay (v Wirt) in 1832 - Clay wins with 53% of the vote
Part 11, Van Buren v The Whigs in 1836 - Whigs win with 87% of the vote, Webster elected
Part 12, Van Buren v Harrison in 1840 - Harrison wins with 90% of the vote
Part 13, Polk v Clay in 1844 - Polk wins with 59% of the vote
Part 14, Taylor v Cass in 1848 - Taylor wins with 44% of the vote (see special rules)
Part 15, Pierce v Scott in 1852 - Scott wins with 78% of the vote
Part 16, Buchanan v Frémont v Fillmore in 1856 - Frémont wins with 95% of the vote
Part 17, Peculiar Thunderdome in 1860 - Lincoln wins with 90% of the vote.
Part 18, Lincoln v McClellan in 1864 - Lincoln wins with 97% of the vote.
Part 19, Grant v Seymour in 1868 - Grant wins with 97% of the vote.
Part 20, Grant v Greeley in 1872 - Grant wins with 96% of the vote.
Part 21, Hayes v Tilden in 1876 - Hayes wins with 87% of the vote.
Part 22, Garfield v Hancock in 1880 - Garfield wins with 67% of the vote.
Part 23, Cleveland v Blaine in 1884 - Cleveland wins with 53% of the vote.
Part 24, Cleveland v Harrison in 1888 - Harrison wins with 64% of the vote.
Part 25, Cleveland v Harrison v Weaver in 1892 - Harrison wins with 57% of the vote
Part 26, McKinley v Bryan in 1896 - McKinley wins with 71% of the vote
Part 27, McKinley v Bryan in 1900 - Bryan wins with 55% of the vote
Part 28, Roosevelt v Parker in 1904 - Roosevelt wins with 71% of the vote
Part 29, Taft v Bryan in 1908 - Taft wins with 64% of the vote
Part 30, Taft v Wilson v Roosevelt in 1912 - Roosevelt wins with 81% of the vote
Part 31, Wilson v Hughes in 1916 - Hughes wins with 62% of the vote
Part 32, Harding v Cox in 1920 - Cox wins with 68% of the vote
Part 33, Coolidge v Davis v La Follette in 1924 - Davis wins with 47% of the vote
Part 34, Hoover v Smith in 1928 - Hoover wins with 50.2% of the vote
Part 35, Hoover v Roosevelt in 1932 - Roosevelt wins with 85% of the vote
Part 36, Landon v Roosevelt in 1936 - Roosevelt wins with 75% of the vote
Part 37, Willkie v Roosevelt in 1940 - Roosevelt wins with 56% of the vote
Part 38, Dewey v Roosevelt in 1944 - Dewey wins with 50.2% of the vote
Part 39, Dewey v Truman in 1948 - Truman wins with 65% of the vote
Part 40, Eisenhower v Stevenson in 1952 - Eisenhower wins with 69% of the vote
Part 41, Eisenhower v Stevenson in 1956 - Eisenhower wins with 60% of the vote
Part 42, Kennedy v Nixon in 1960 - Kennedy wins with 63% of the vote
Part 43, Johnson v Goldwater in 1964 - Johnson wins with 87% of the vote
Part 44, Nixon v Humphrey in 1968 - Humphrey wins with 60% of the vote
Part 45, Nixon v McGovern in 1972 - Nixon wins with 56% of the vote
Part 46, Carter v Ford in 1976 - Carter wins with 71% of the vote
Part 47 - Carter v Reagan v Anderson in 1980 - Carter wins with 44% of the vote
Part 48, Reagan v Mondale in 1984 - Mondale wins with 55% of the vote
Part 49, Bush v Dukakis in 1988 - Bush wins with 54% of the vote
Part 50, Bush v Clinton v Perot in 1992 - Clinton wins with 71% of the vote
Part 51, Clinton v Dole in 1996 - Clinton wins with 91% of the vote
Part 52, Bush v Gore in 2000 - Gore wins with 88% of the vote
Part 53, Bush v Kerry in 2004 - Kerry wins with 89% of the vote
Part 54, Obama v McCain in 2008 - Obama wins with 90% of the vote
Welcome back to the fifty-fifth edition of /neoliberal elects the American presidents!
This will be a fairly consistent weekly thing - every week, a new election, until we run out.
I highly encourage you - at least in terms of the vote you cast - to try to think from the perspective of the year the election was held, without knowing the future or how the next administration would go. I'm not going to be trying to enforce that, but feel free to remind fellow commenters of this distinction.
If you're really feeling hardcore, feel free to even speak in the present tense as if the election is truly upcoming!
Whether third and fourth candidates are considered "major" enough to include in the strawpoll will be largely at my discretion and depend on things like whether they were actually intending to run for President, and whether they wound up actually pulling in a meaningful amount of the popular vote and even electoral votes. I may also invoke special rules in how the results will be interpreted in certain elections to better approximate historical reality.
While I will always give some brief background info to spur the discussion, please don't hesitate to bring your own research and knowledge into the mix! There's no way I'll cover everything!
Mitt Romney v Barack Obama, 2012
Profiles
  • Barack Obama is the 51-year-old Democratic candidate and the current President. His running mate is Vice President Joe Biden.
  • Mitt Romney is the 65-year-old Republican candidate and the former Governor of Massachusetts. His running mate is Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.
Issues and Background
  • The Great Recession is over, but the slow pace of the recovery has frustrated many. The jobs market in particular has been slow to recover, with unemployment, which had peaked at 10% in 2009, only just starting to move below 8%. President Obama is quick to remind people on the situation he inherited, while Governor Romney has argued that people should not be complacent with the slow pace of the recovery.
    • In February 2009, President Obama signed a stimulus bill with the intention of mitigating or reversing the recession. The approximately 800 billion dollar package was seen as excessive or an ineffective solution by most Republicans, with only a few in Congress voting for it. Some on the left have criticized the stimulus for not being larger. The stimulus included tax credits, aid to schools, extended unemployment benefits, infrastructure investment, and other spending. Two groups of 200 economists, both including multiple Nobel laureates, signed statements, one supporting and one opposing the stimulus. Romney has called the stimulus "the biggest, most careless one-time expenditure by the federal government in history."
    • In 2010, President Obama signed what has become known as "Dodd-Frank," a piece of legislation which reformed regulation of the financial services industry. It reorganized the relevant bureaucracy and gave the Federal Reserve new oversight and regulatory powers. The legislation also restricted certain speculative behaviors of commercial banks, increased transparency especially with regard to derivatives, and established the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, a concept proposed by bankruptcy legal scholar and frequent government advisor Elizabeth Warren (now also running for Senate.) Mitt Romney has vowed to repeal and replace Dodd-Frank, arguing that while he supports some parts of the legislation, too much of it has unintended consequences or is unclear.
    • In 2008, a sizable chunk of the TARP funds were directed to the auto industry, but this did not fully cure the industry's ills. In 2009, the Obama Administration walked General Motors and Chrysler through significant restructuring and the bankruptcy process, providing both businesses with additional funds from the Treasury along the way. President Obama has criticized Romney for having said in 2008 that the government should "let Detroit go bankrupt." Romney points out that he argued for a managed bankruptcy, and that what he argued for is not far off from what did actually happen in the end.
  • In 2010, President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act, which has become colloquially known as "ObamaCare." The legislation expanded Medicaid eligibility, radically overhauled the non-employer-based health insurance market for individuals, prevented health insurance companies from discriminating based on pre-existing conditions or an array of non-age-based demographic factors, required most individuals and families to obtain some kind of health insurance, and placed additional tax burden on companies employing 50 or more people which do not provide health insurance to their full-time employees. Governor Romney has pledged to grant state waivers and repeal the ACA as quickly as possible. In place of the ACA, Romney seeks to "pursue policies that give each state the power to craft a health care reform plan that is best for its own citizens."
    • As Governor of Massachusetts, Romney implemented health care reform very similar to the ACA but at the state level, sometimes now called "Romneycare." Democrats (and Republicans during the primary) have accused him of hypocrisy, while he argues that there are some legislative differences, that his plan was passed in a bipartisan manner, and that this type of reform should be done at the state level.
    • Romney has repeatedly accused President Obama of cutting $716 billion from Medicare for the ACA. This refers to the fact that the ACA lowered Medicare reimbursement rates to private health insurance companies (via Medicare Advantage) and to hospitals. So while the ACA did technically cut $716 billion from Medicare spending, it does not directly cut benefits in any way, which President Obama touts as greater efficiency in Medicare. Romney argues that these cuts will lead to less hospitals and doctors taking on Medicare patients.
  • In light of the outbreak of the Libyan Civil War, the Obama Administration took part in a NATO intervention last year in Libya, which involved enforcing a no-fly zone over the country. In October of last year, former leader of Libya Muammar Gaddafi was killed brutally by rebel forces. Significant chaos and confusion has occurred in the aftermath. On the night of September 11th of this year, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a statement confirming that the US consulate in Benghazi had been attacked, and that at least one State official was killed. In the end, it was revealed that US Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens had been killed, as well as a USFS officer and two CIA contractors.
    • Initially, some government statements indicated a belief that the attack had occurred as a result of protests over an anti-Islamic short film, protests that escalated to violence. In the following week, the Obama Administration sent mixed messages about whether or not they believed the attack had been premeditated. In October, it was revealed that there were no protests prior to the attacks at all. Recently, Reuters reported that within 2 hours of the attack, the Obama Administration became aware that terrorist group Ansar al-Sharia had taken credit for it. The Administration has framed these mixed and evolving messages as a result of faulty intelligence and a developing understanding of what happened.
    • Governor Romney has criticized President Obama for his State Department denying requests for more security at the consulate, the mixed messages in the aftermath, and the President's attendance of political events in the days following the attack.
  • In May of last year, President Obama announced:
    Tonight, I can report to the American people and to the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda, and a terrorist who's responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.
  • In addition to UN sanctions against Iran, in 2010 the US implemented additional unilateral sanctions targeting Iran's energy and banking sectors. The international community has been in agreement to use sanctions to discourage Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This year, the US extended sanctions to Iran's central bank. Iran's currency has fallen to record lows against the US dollar, a sign of the effects of the sanctions. Romney has criticized Obama for his "willingness to talk without preconditions or pressure, his shameful refusal to support dissidents in 2009 as they were being killed in the streets, his efforts to oppose and water down crippling sanctions on Iran’s Central Bank, and his administration’s constant efforts to talk down the military option."
  • By the end of last year, the Obama Administration had completed the full withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, in line with the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement. Since the withdrawal, a large number of large-scale insurgent and terrorist bombings have occurred. The Obama Administration has argued that the withdrawal in Iraq allowed for more effective efforts in Afghanistan, a conflict which President Obama in turn expects to end in 2014. Romney has criticized Obama for failing to come to an agreement with Iraq for a residual force and continuing training efforts to take place.
  • In September, a leaked video (1) (2) of remarks from Mitt Romney at a private fundraiser became the source of significant controversy. At one point in the video, Romney says:
    There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That's an entitlement. The government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. And I mean the president starts off with 48, 49... he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect.
  • Governor Romney has accused China of "artificially holding down the value of their currency" and has pledged to label China a currency manipulator on his first day in office. President Obama has pointed out that China's currency has strengthened while he has been in office.
  • Mitt Romney and other Republicans have repeatedly emphasized Solyndra as an example of what they call the Obama Administration's failed energy policy. The solar panel manufacturer was given a loan of over $500 million in 2009 by the Energy Department, but ultimately failed and declared bankruptcy in 2011. It failed due to the success of Chinese firms in the same market, the decreasing price of a raw material which Solyndra did not incorporate in its panels (originally part of Solyndra's appeal) and questionable decisions by management. It has been revealed the political considerations were repeatedly brought up in decisions related to Solyndra and other energy company investments.
  • Mitt Romney's time leading private equity investment firm Bain Capital has come under significant scrutiny. As a piece in Politico put it:
    The Obama campaign wants you to know that Mitt Romney took over companies, laid off workers, canceled health plans, shipped jobs overseas and walked away with millions. The Romney campaign wants you to know that the former private equity CEO was a brilliant investor who founded a business, made it an international powerhouse and helped grow companies that created tens of thousands of jobs.
    The Wall Street Journal examined 77 businesses that Bain invested in during Romney's tenure and found that 22% of them closed or declared bankruptcy within 8 years of initial investment. However, some of the success stories were notable and include Dominos and Staples.
  • In 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton kicked off an attempt to improve relations with Russia known as the "Russian reset" by presenting Sergey Lavrov with a red "reset" button to push. Significant efforts were made that year to improve relations which did eventually succeed in a new nuclear arms reduction agreement, but since then, such efforts have begun to be complicated by new sources of tension. President Obama and other Democrats have criticized Romney for calling Russia the greatest geopolitical foe of the United States, arguing that this is Cold War foreign policy. Romney has criticized Obama for his comments caught on a hot mic in which he told the Russian President that he would have "more flexibility" to deal with contentious issues after the election.
  • In July, President Obama gave remarks in Virginia that have become a significant focus of Republican attacks:
    If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
    Republicans have framed President Obama's comments as saying that business owners did not build their business, while President Obama and his allies have argued that this is taking the comments out of context, and that he was referring to infrastructure like roads and bridges having not been built by the business owners. Fact checkers have disagreed about how clear President Obama's intent in his statement was, with Politifact suggesting his meaning was clear while FactCheck.org has argued it was not.
  • Mitt Romney went on a foreign trip to several countries in July, but a couple incidents on the trip became a source of controversy. Most prominently, Governor Romney spoke negatively of the London Olympics preparations, saying:
    You know, it's hard to know just how well it will turn out. There were a few things that were disconcerting - stories about the private security firm not having enough people, a supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials. That, obviously, is not something which is encouraging.
    The remarks set off significant negative coverage of Romney in the British media, as well as rebukes from British officials. Prime Minister David Cameron remarked on it being a lot more difficult to set up the Olympic games in London than "in the middle of nowhere" and London Mayor Boris Johnson mentioned Romney by name in an energetic speech, saying:
    There are some people who are coming from around the world who don’t yet know about all the preparations we've done to get London ready in the last seven years. I hear there’s a guy called Mitt Romney who wants to know whether we’re ready. He wants to know whether we’re ready. Are we ready? Are we ready? Yes, we are!
  • Just recently, the northeast was struck by the historically enormous Hurricane Sandy, which has caused tens of billions of dollars of damage and killed many people. Republican Governor Chris Christie has praised President Obama's response to the disaster.
  • Governor Romney has repeatedly claimed that President Obama began his presidency with an "apology tour" of foreign nations. President Obama and his allies, supported by fact-checkers like Politifact, say that none of the statements that Romney refers to are apologies. Romney's examples are listed here and include the following.
    In France in 2009:
    In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive. But in Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what's bad.
    In the UK in 2009:
    I would say that if you look at the sources of this crisis, the United States certainly has some accounting to do with respect to a regulatory system that was inadequate to the massive changes that had taken place in the global financial system.
  • In 1983 on a family road trip, Mitt Romney drove 12 hours with his dog on top of the car in a windshield-equipped carrier. This has come up occasionally during the campaign, including in an ad during the Republican primary.
Debate Excerpts
First Presidential Debate (full transcript)
(1) Romney on tax policy:
Well, sure, I'd like to clear up the record and go through piece by piece. First of all, I don't have a $5 trillion tax cut. I don't have a tax cut of the scale that you're talking about. My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. But I'm not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people. High-income people are doing just fine in this economy. They'll do fine whether you're President or I am.
(2) Obama on small businesses:
And we do have a difference, though, when it comes to definitions of small business. Under my plan, 97 percent of small businesses would not see their income taxes go up. Governor Romney says, well, those top 3 percent, they're the job creators, they'd be burdened. But under Governor Romney's definition, there are a whole bunch of millionaires and billionaires who are small businesses. Donald Trump is a small business. And I know Donald Trump doesn't like to think of himself as small anything, but that's how you define small businesses if you're getting business income.
(3) Romney on spending cuts:
What things would I cut from spending? Well, first of all, I will eliminate all programs by this test if they don't pass it: Is the program so critical it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it? And if not, I'll get rid of it. Obamacare is on my list. I apologize, Mr. President. I use that term with all respect. [Obama interjects: "I like it"] Good. Okay, good. So I'll get rid of that. I'm sorry, Jim, I'm going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I'm going to stop other things. I like PBS. I love Big Bird. I actually like you too. But I'm not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for it. That's number one.
(4) Obama on Dodd-Frank:
Now, Governor Romney has said he wants to repeal Dodd-Frank, and I appreciate—and it appears we've got some agreement that a marketplace, to work, has to have some regulation. But in the past, Governor Romney has said he just wants to repeal Dodd-Frank. Roll it back. And so the question is, does anybody out there think that the big problem we had is that there was too much oversight and regulation of Wall Street? Because if you do, then Governor Romney is your candidate.
Vice-Presidential Debate (full transcript)
(1) Biden on Benghazi:
With all due respect, that's a bunch of malarkey. [Moderator: "And why is that so?"] Because not a single thing he said is accurate ... Number one, the — this lecture on embassy security — the congressman here cut embassy security in his budget by $300 million below what we asked for, number one. So much for the embassy security piece.
Number two, Governor Romney, before he knew the facts, before he even knew that our ambassador was killed, he was out making a political statement which was panned by the media around the world. And this talk about this — this weakness. I — I don't understand what my friend's talking about here.
(2) Ryan on abortion:
Now, you want to ask basically why I'm pro-life? It's not simply because of my Catholic faith. That's a factor, of course. But it's also because of reason and science.
You know, I think about 10 1/2 years ago, my wife Janna and I went to Mercy Hospital in Janesville where I was born, for our seven week ultrasound for our firstborn child, and we saw that heartbeat. A little baby was in the shape of a bean. And to this day, we have nicknamed our firstborn child Liza, "Bean." Now I believe that life begins at conception.
Second Presidential Debate (Town Hall) (full transcript)
(1) Obama on Romney's fiscal plans:
Look, the cost of lowering rates for everybody across the board 20 percent, along with what he also wants to do in terms of eliminating the estate tax, along what he wants to do in terms of corporate changes in the Tax Code, it costs about $5 trillion. Governor Romney then also wants to spend $2 trillion on additional military programs, even though the military is not asking for them. That's $7 trillion. He also wants to continue the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. That's another trillion dollars. That's $8 trillion.
(2) Romney on gender equality:
Thank you, an important topic and one which I learned a great deal about, particularly as I was serving as Governor of my State, because I had the chance to pull together a cabinet, and all the applicants seemed to be men. And I went to my staff, and I said, how come all the people for these jobs are all men? And they said, well, these are the people that have the qualifications. And I said, well, gosh, can't we find some women that are also qualified? And so we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet. I went to a number of women's groups and said, can you help us find folks? And they brought us whole binders full of women.
I was proud of the fact that after I staffed my cabinet and my senior staff, that the University of New York in Albany did a survey of all 50 States and concluded that mine had more women in senior leadership positions than any other State in America.
(3) Obama on differences between Romney and Bush:
There are some things where Governor Romney is different from George Bush. George Bush didn't propose turning Medicare into a voucher. George Bush embraced comprehensive immigration reform; he didn't call for self-deportation. George Bush never suggested that we eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood.
(4) Romney on illegal immigration:
Now, let me mention one other thing, and that is self-deportation says, let people make their own choice. What I was saying is we're not going to round up 12 million people, undocumented [censored for auto-mod], and take them out of the Nation. Instead, let people make their own choice. And if they find that they can't get the benefits here that they want and they can't find the job they want, then they'll make a decision to go a place where they have better opportunities.
But I'm not in favor of rounding up people and taking them out of this country. I am in favor, as the President has said—and I agree with him—which is that if people have committed crimes, we've got to get them out of this country.
Third Presidential Debate (full transcript)
(1) Obama on Romney's foreign policy priorities:
Governor Romney, I'm glad that you recognize that Al Qaeda is a threat, because a few months ago, when you were asked what's the biggest geopolitical threat facing America, you said Russia. Not Al Qaeda, you said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back, because the cold war has been over for 20 years. But, Governor, when it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s, just like the social policies of the 1950s, and the economic policies of the 1920s.
(2) Romney on Syria:
Well, let's step back and talk about what's happening in Syria and how important it is. First of all, 30,000 people being killed by their Government is a humanitarian disaster. Secondly, Syria is an opportunity for us because Syria plays an important role in the Middle East, particularly right now. Syria is Iran's only ally in the Arab world. It's their route to the sea. It's the route for them to arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of course, our ally, Israel. And so seeing Syria remove Assad is a very high priority for us. Number two, seeing a replacement Government being responsible people is critical for us.
And finally, we don't want to have military involvement there. We don't want to get drawn in to a military conflict. And so the right course for us is working through our partners and with our own resources to identify responsible parties within Syria, organize them, bring them together in a form of, if not government, a form of council that can take the lead in Syria, and then make sure they have the arms necessary to defend themselves.
Platforms
Read the full 2012 Republican platform here.
Read the full 2012 Democratic platform here.
Internet Resources
Romney/Ryan website
Obama/Biden website
Videos
Debates
First Presidential Debate
Vice-Presidential Debate
Second Presidential Debate (Town Hall)
Third Presidential Debate
Advertisements
Obama anti-Romney singing ad
Obama positive record ad
Obama anti-Romney "Romney economics" ad
Obama Bill Clinton ad
Romney anti-Obama "you didn't build that" ad
Romney economic record ad
Romney anti-Obama coal quote ad
Romney "day one" ad
Strawpoll
>>>VOTE HERE<<<
submitted by John_Charles_Fremont to neoliberal [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 22:10 mangogreentea_ Was dating always this terrible?

I remember when I was in high school, people entered a relationship when they liked each other. Two people were friends, and someone would confess that they have feelings for that person. Once they established that they have feelings for each other, they would automatically be in a relationship. Everyone would start referring to them as a couple, and they called each other boyfriend/girlfriend. Breakups also happened pretty quickly. It wasn't complicated. People weren't hooking up or dating casually, in fact, most of my classmates were single and sex was viewed as something you did with your long-term partner or in marriage. Many of my classmates were waiting until marriage to have sex actually (my classmates were predominantly Sikh, Hindu, and Muslim). People had crushes, but a lot of times they didn't lead to anything. Everyone just mostly focused on their studies and getting into a good university. I grew up in a predominantly immigrant suburb, so maybe we were more conservative than other places in Canada...
You could imagine my shock when I entered university and everyone was hooking up, on dating apps, and partying. I foolishly thought that when someone kissed you, it automatically meant that he liked you and wanted to be in a relationship with you (because this was what I witnessed as a teenager, and what I witnessed in all the teenage romance books I read and teen movies). Can you imagine how horrifyingly wrong I was? Lol.
Anyway, was dating always this awful? There are commitment phobes everywhere, hookups, FWBs... People are so sketchy and avoidant nowadays. They'll use people so easily without any regard for the other person's feelings.
submitted by mangogreentea_ to FemaleDatingStrategy [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 10:48 Purifyingmygaze Accountability partner

I am looking for an accountability partner, preferably someone who is in the same stage of life as myself. I am 24 Male, from the UK, and Indian muslim.
I have never tried using an accountability partner or group before but I feel ready to try it out.
submitted by Purifyingmygaze to MuslimNoFap [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 10:45 theworkersrights Erdogan protects his interests other than Islam

The Sultan complicit with China in crimes against Muslims of Xinjiang

Muslims who today share the speeches of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on social networks should know that this is just a huge lie. The Muslim community, although offended or irritated by what has happened in France in recent weeks, should be aware that Erdogan is not lashing out at Macron in his defense, but for mere economic interests.
Erdogan, who suggested Macron needs "a psychiatric visit" is not only responsible for the extermination of the Kurdish people, and for horrendous crimes against activists and journalists who have documented his support for Daesh, but is also complicit in the crimes towards the Uyghur people, the Turkic Muslims of Xinjiang, in western China. The minority is the victim of terrible human rights violations by China, the main economic partner of Ankara.
"Frankly, the incidents in China against Uyghurs are genocide," Erdogan said in 2009 when he was Prime Minister. As the French newspaper “Courier International” writes, those of the sultan were not just empty words. Turkey has served as a refuge for Uighurs fleeing persecution since the day the Chinese Communist Party took control of Xinjiang in 1949, hosting one of the largest Uighur diasporas in the world.
However, Ankara has changed its tone sharply over the years. In 2016, Turkey arrested Abdulkadir Yapcan, a famous Uyghur political activist who had lived in the country since 2001, and initiated extradition proceedings against him. In 2017, Turkey and China signed an agreement allowing extradition, permanently turning a blind eye to the human rights of Muslims. Since early 2019, Ankara has arrested hundreds of Uighurs and placed them in deportation centers, a practice condemned by the international community.
This sharp change in Erdogan policies has a very simple explanation: his regime and the Turkish economy are in crisis. His friends are in short supply. He has more and more enemies in Europe and the Arab world. Ankara is counting on Beijing to help it recover, which implies adhering to the rhetoric of Chinese power. The Turkish lira has reached an all-time low of the last 50 years in exchange with the dollar, and Erdogan will also face European sanctions very soon.
The country economy was hit hard by the Covid-19 pandemic, which devastated its tourism sector, one of its pillars. As Erdogan tightens his control over the central bank and the courts, foreign exchange reserves are shrinking, the trade deficit is growing, and the Turkish lira is in free fall. Human rights are the ultimate Ankara concern, despite pressure from the European Union. Muslims must not be deceived by speeches that appeal to their emotions, because in reality, Erdogan has never defended Islam, but only his interests.
https://www.theworkersrights.com/human-rights/2020/10/26/erdogan-protects-his-interests-other-than-islam/
submitted by theworkersrights to EuropeanFederalists [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 03:01 autotldr France: Calls for boycotting French products in Middle East ‘must stop immediately’

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 63%. (I'm a bot)
France urged countries in the Middle East to stop calls for boycotting French products, amid controversy over the use of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad in a French school class on freedom of expression whose teacher was then murdered by someone French President Emmanuel Macron labeled an "Islamist."
The French Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement on Sunday that the calls for boycotting French products in several Middle Eastern countries and calls for demonstrations against France are "Baseless and should stop immediately."
The ministry said that it mobilized its diplomatic network to explain France's stances to its partners and called on governments to distance themselves from any boycott calls and "Ensure the safety of French nationals."
There have been several social media campaigns in Muslim countries calling for boycotting French products.
Kuwait's retail co-ops have pulled French products in boycott.
Several co-ops visited by Reuters on Sunday had cleared the shelves of items such as hair and beauty products made by French companies.
Summary Source FAQ Feedback Top keywords: French#1 France#2 teacher#3 calls#4 cartoon#5
Post found in /worldnews, /AutoNewspaper and /ARABIYAauto.
NOTICE: This thread is for discussing the submission topic. Please do not discuss the concept of the autotldr bot here.
submitted by autotldr to autotldr [link] [comments]


2020.10.26 01:18 Sadge2020 How do I politely break up my engagement?

I've come to the conclusion that the girl I am engaged to, is not for me. The only problem is that I'm trying to figure out how to politely break up the engagement without making myself and my parents look bad. I'll explain how I got here.
Background
January of this year I went to this girl's place with my parents. They are kind of related to us. The girl in question is the niece of an aunt that married one of my uncles. So we're not directly related. My mom told me a little about this girl and I was opposed to the idea. I told my mom I want a girl that grew up here in the west (I'm Dutch with Pakistani roots). To me, it's important that my partner understands the nuances of growing up in the west as a Muslim/non-white person.
The girl had a troubled childhood. Her father was abusive and beat his wife. He even threw her down the stairs, breaking a few bones in the process. Needless to say, her mother left him and had to move around a lot, depending on her family. The girl lived in Pakistan and then later in England, before moving back to Germany in her late teens.
As you can already tell, this doesn't promise much good. I proceeded, knowing some of these things with good faith at the time. Even though I was initially opposed, my mom insisted and I thought giving it a shot could be worth it.
Back to January, we go to her place. I don't get to see the girl except for like 2 minutes. We don't even talk at all. Her two younger brothers and an uncle took me to play pool. I figured they were vetting me. We played some pool and went back to their house, had food, etc. They seemed like a good family, but we kind of already knew that.
Only 6 weeks later, mid-February, I'm engaged to this girl. I was kind of overwhelmed now that I think about it. Everyone wanted to move super fast. Her family was pushing for Nikah in summer. I kinda halfheartedly agreed to the engagement, but marriage this quickly made me way too uncomfortable and I told them no. Especially because our mosque will not perform Nikah unless you also marry legally. I do not want to take that step lightly.
I later found out that her grandmother was planning on sending this girl to Pakistan to marry off to some guy there. The girl's mother felt pressured to find someone here. I have a feeling that they really pushed hard on my mother, because she is quite an emotional person, whereas I'm very rational.
Problems
I've already mentioned some pretty bad signs. An abusive father and consequently no father figure during formative years, lots of moving around as a child. Again, I was willing to see past these issues.
I started talking to her over text about a week after we went to her place. She got attached to me real quick. I still don't understand why, but she was completely in love with me. Me being rational, I was very confused. I'm not a super attractive guy or anything. I'm actually a bit overweight and used to dress pretty poorly. So when I see this girl being madly in love with a guy that she barely knows, that was a pretty big red flag to me.
This only got worse over time. She got very needy and wanted constant validation from me. It was obvious she was doing all these things for me, hoping I would talk to her and like her more. She would also get mad if I didn't respond to her texts and I had been online.
After the initial mystery kind of faded, any attraction that was there was gone. Her constant asking for validation got to me. No matter what I said or did, it didn't work. If I was nice and told her politely that I didn't appreciate some of her behaviour, she would overreact. If I didn't text her a few days, she would be texting me things like "do all guys cheat?", "Is not telling the whole truth a form of lying?", etc. When I would tell her that I don't like it when she says these things, she would take it personally, only making things worse.
At one point her mother called my parents. We had a long call together, during which I straight up told them that I don't think this is a good match. She is overinvested in me while she barely knows me. Her mom didn't react well to this and basically tried to cover for her daughter. What's worse is that my parents agreed with her and kept telling me that I'm the one who is wrong.
Now
Basically, the same cycle kept repeating itself. Things go okay for a week and then she gets needy again. I pull back, she gets upset. I ignore her for a few days. I test her a little bit by sharing a meme, youtube video or whatever, things go okay for a week...
I've never dated girls or anything. I don't know how to break up. I tried one time as I said at the end of the previous part, but that didn't work out too well.
This time I have made up my mind that I do not want to continue. The question how do I do this? I know for a fact that my parents will not be happy. Her mother is going to be emotional. On top of that this will make things awkward with my uncle and aunt since this is their niece. I could really use some help here.
submitted by Sadge2020 to MuslimMarriage [link] [comments]


2020.10.25 19:08 throwaway1290111 I [22F] am agnostic and my partner [24M] is Muslim and wants me to learn about Islam and eventually accept it. I need help

Dear people,
I am feeling quite desperate and unsure about what to do next. I am a 22 year old woman (born in Christianity, but considering myself agnostic) and my partner (24M) is a Muslim. When we met, I didn't know much about Islam and I didn't know how important it is for him. As time went by, I became aware that the only way we could properly be together is if I convert. He has told me straight that he cannot marry me otherwise, even though he wants to. He is a very caring and sweet guy, but I feel pressured to learn an adapt to the religion.
Whenever we talk about it, an argument arises because Islam (and other religions in general) does not make sense to me. He tries to explain as much as he can and I see his effort, but it is just not working. It doesn't feel right. He says that he would feel suicidal if he didn't have a faith as I do and says that I am being selfish and not trying my best to understand the point of life and learn about it. He always calls it philosophy and says how it's the most important thing in life.
I do not mind him having these beliefs, but I do not want to convert. I am having a really hard time with deciding what to do. I love him, but in my heart I don't see how this can work out. If I do convert and we get married, this means that many things will change for me (basically my whole life because I've lived in a different culture) and I do not see the point. He doesn't want me to convert just for him, he wants me to learn about it and truly understand and accept it, as he fears that I will go to hell. I know that he has good intentions at heart, but unfortunately I can't make sense of this.
Could you please let me know what you think? Thank you.
Edit: Guys you are amazing. I didn't expect to get so many comments. I wanted to update you on what I decided. Him and I had another conversation about this topic and I decided that I am not converting and will not be looking into it anymore and that the best decision is to end all contact. I will not convert to Islam and all of your replies have brought a lot of perspective for me too. I explained how I was seeing thing and even though we love each other, we agreed that this is going nowhere and I decided to stop being in touch as I see no other option. This is not something entirely new because I was highly considering it in the past week, but you guys definitely gave me the push I needed. Thank you so much. For now things seem calm. I hope that he won't bother me in any way but I think he understood what I meant and that I am firm on it. Again, big THANK YOU!!!! You have saved me from making a big mistake.
submitted by throwaway1290111 to exmuslim [link] [comments]


2020.10.25 16:03 autotldr Turkey's Erdogan says French leader has 'lost his way' in second broadside

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 31%. (I'm a bot)
2 Min Read.ISTANBUL - Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said on Sunday Emmanuel Macron had "Lost his way", in his second sharp criticism of the French leader in two days over the treatment of Muslims.
On Saturday, Erdogan said Macron had a problem with Muslims and needed mental checks - a rebuke that caused France to recall its ambassador from Ankara.
"The person in charge of France has lost his way. He goes on about Erdogan all day. Look at yourself first and where you are going. I said in Kayseri yesterday, he is a case and he really must be checked up," Erdogan said in a televised speech in the eastern province of Malatya.
The French leader this month declared war on "Islamist separatism", which he believes is taking over some Muslim communities in France.
Macron's office said on Saturday France had gathered its European partners, who share France's demand that Turkey puts a stop to its "Dangerous adventures" in the Mediterranean and in the region.
Erdogan is a pious Muslim and since his Islamist-rooted AK Party first came to power in 2002, he has sought to shift Islam into the mainstream of politics in Turkey, an overwhelmingly Muslim but constitutionally secular country.
Summary Source FAQ Feedback Top keywords: France#1 Erdogan#2 Muslim#3 Turkey#4 leader#5
Post found in /worldnews.
NOTICE: This thread is for discussing the submission topic. Please do not discuss the concept of the autotldr bot here.
submitted by autotldr to autotldr [link] [comments]


2020.10.25 16:01 Flcherrybomb Facebook appoints third party "oversight board" to be in charge of Censorship. Most have ties to Soros

I did the research for you. Facebook appointed a board of directors for its censorship board. They will hear cases And decide what is allowed on the platform and what is not. It will not be under the control of Mark Zuckerbergg
on the board are zero far-right conservatives. There is one open conservative who is only mildly conservative and nobody who supportedd President Trump or believes in free speech
Here is the list and various sources
.
.
Michael McConnell Professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center Stanford Law School
The only open Conservative
Katherine Chen Professor National Chengchi University Taiwan
Jamal Greene Professor Columbia Law School
Served as an aide to Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) during Justice Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings when Harris stated that Kavanaugh was a “a direct and fundamental threat” to the Supreme Court’s promise to carry out justice fairly. United States of America
Helle Thorning-Schmidt Former Prime Minister Denmark
CEO of Save the Children International an organization partnered with Open Society Foundations. She additionally serves as a trustee of the International Crisis Group a group that George Soros funded originally and one where he and his son Alexander both serve as trustees alongside Helle.
One of at least six of the 15 international members of the board who openly espouse anti-Trump sentiments. She posted recently on Twitter over a photo of Obama endorsing presumptive Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden: “The endorsement!! OMG Miss the voice of decency and grace.” Denmark
Afia Asantewaa Asare-Kyei Program Manager Open Society Initiative for West Africa
Senegal & Ghana
Evelyn Aswad Professor and Chair University of Oklahoma College of Law United States of America
Tawakkol Karman Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Interview with the Spanish daily El Pais that she did “not trust Trump because I do not trust racist people.” Yemen
Julie Owono Executive Director Internet Sans Frontières Cameroon & France
Sudhir Krishnaswamy Vice Chancellor and Professor of Law National Law School of India University Sudhir Krishnaswamy also appears to have benefited from an Open Society grant
https://www3.wcl.american.edu/cni/0601/38457.html India
Nighat Dad Founder Digital Rights Foundation Pakistan
Alan Rusbridger Principal Lady Margaret Hall Oxford
Former Guardian Editor He tweeted in late March that the press should shut down President Donald Trump’s press conferences. “Completely agree that media should stop live broadcasting Trump especially since he rejects robust challenges from reporters.” This is Facebook’s new commitment to free speech. United Kingdom
Maina Kiai Director Human Rights Watch Global Alliances and Partnerships
Maina Kiai sits on the Advisory Board for the Human Rights Initiative of Soros' Open Society Foundations Kenya
Endy Bayuni Senior Editor and Board Member The Jakarta Post Indonesia
Andras Sajo former judge and vice president of the European Court of Human Rights
Ronaldo Lemos Professor Rio de Janeiro State University’s Law School remember of Mozilla Brazil
Emi Palmor Advocate and Lecturer Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya Israel Under her direction the Israeli justice ministry “petitioned Facebook to censor legitimate speech of human rights defenders and journalists because it was deemed politically undesirable ” Palestinian civil society groups stated this month. http://www.alhaq.org/advocacy/16865.html Israel
Pamela Karlan Professor Stanford Law School
Peter Baker a New York Times political writer described Karlan as “a full-throated unapologetic liberal torchbearer” https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/04/us/politics/pamela-karlan.html UnitedUnited States of America
Catalina Botero-Marino pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights funded by soros Open Society Foundations.Colombia
John Samples Vice President Cato Institute United States of America
Nicolas Suzor Professor School of Law at Queensland University of Technology
written that "neutrality" on social media platforms is "causing problems" and that "neutral tools that do not actively take inequality into account will almost inevitably contribute to the amplification of inequality." He even suggested that dissent from the Left's global warming positions could also be viewed as dangerous. "Racism misogyny and bigotry anti-vaccination content misinformation self-harm and climate change denial — all require difficult judgments about when one person’s speech is harmful to others."Australia
András Sajó University Professor Central European University
Held positions in Open Society organizations including on the Board of Directors of the Open Society Justice Initiative and is allegedly an old friend of Soros. Hungary
Thomas Hughes Oversight Board Executive Director Thomas Hughes comes from Article 19 which has received more than $2 million from Soros.
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nb-staff/2020/05/07/free-speech-alliance-facebook-oversight-board-packed-liberals
http://abouthungary.hu/blog/introducing-facebooks-soros-oversight-board/
https://cms.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/05/facebook-puts-soros-muslim-brotherhood-activists-daniel-greenfield
https://www.oversightboard.com/meet-the-board/
https://www.mrc.org/freespeechalliance
submitted by Flcherrybomb to conspiracy [link] [comments]


2020.10.25 02:19 Ryuhaneon I (18F) and my boyfriend (25M), in a long-distance relationship, want to make our relationship work, even tho we treat each other like trash

We've been together for 8+ months, and the last three or four were absolute hell. I'm not very brief so please bear with me and thank you so much if you get to the end.
We met together in an online video game with no intentions to date. I am an extremely unhealthy person and I just can't get along with people. I have extremely low self-esteem, I'm very suspicious and self-conscious, I'm very nervous and anxious when around people, and I'm just painfully awkward to be with. But to cut this part, he was just amazing and the only person who ever made me feel happy amd appreciated. We started dating after a month.
The first month together was the best time of my life ever but since then, it only went downhill... For sake of shortening, here's a list of big issues that took a huge toll on us: - strict muslim parents, demanding arranged marriage - differences in religion (and I'd have to be the one to proselytize..) - he lives in a foreign country (and I'd have to move there..) - age gap and kids (I'd have to get pregnant earlier than I want to..) - and all the issues concerning emigrating to another country (learning the language, trying to study there, being completely dependent on my partner, and so on) .
I don't know what other huge issues we had together but I think I covered the most.
These problems completely fucked me up and over, from the back, the side, the fucking midair. They were the beginning of our never-ending arguments. He's very hard to compromise with, and I can tell you, that what I'm willing to do for him, he'd never under any circumstances do for me.. Our differences started to show more and more.. You see, even tho we look very similar on the surface, fundamentally, we're extremely different. He's rule-based, traditional, hard-working, disciplined. I on the other hand... I'm all... E M O T I O N A L. And he doesn't get that shit at all. I don't want to discredit him, I love him very much, and he's trying very hard, and I'm proud of him whenever he achieves anything, but I just feel lost and hopeless most of the time.. I explain and explain, and he just doesn't get it, doesn't remember, doesn't accept.. It's unbelievable frustrating when the person you love doesn't understand you and doesn't remember most of the things you say. It's as frustrating but being able to understand him back...
Here comes the best part. I did say I'm an extremely unhealthy person, didn't I? I'm a complete mess. I won't uncover my life story, but basically, I was being abused by my mother till 11, then I moved to my father's, him being quick to anger.. I don't know when it started in my relationship with my boyfriend, but eventually, I became very paranoid. Extremely paranoid actually. We argue every single day even several times a day. If I feel like he texts me in a less lovely tone, I completely explode, and tell him how he hates me, how he's tired of me, and shit like that.. I know it sounds horrible, but I'm not going that for fun, I genuinely believe it, I genuinely feel my whole life feeling apart, him leaving me behind, loosing him forever. I was completely fine at the start of the relationship but then it started getting worse and worse and now everything ticks me off.. I believe he hates me, and it's my fault. I believe I'm unlovable and I'm trying to find any proof possible that would demonstrate his hatred towards me. It's seriously literally anything. The "tone" of the message, amount of emojis, if he calls me my pet name or real name, if he uses acronyms or the words. When he gets busy and wants to leave for work, I take it as a definitive sign of break up. When he says he wants to go sleep because he feels tired, it means for me he hates me and that I make him bored.. Because if he actually loved me, he'd sacrifice all those things for me right? .. Right?... Because I'd sacrifice my sleep, work or life for him.. I feel like I'm going crazy. I hate myself for this, so extremely much. And yet this is completely nothing against what is going on in my head, i could go on for hours and hours about scenarios my brain creates. It's not fun.. Neither does my boyfriend find them fun after 6 hours of constant shit.. Not only that, when the conversation gets very heated (which is like 50% of the time..) I start insulting him.. In a very harsh and disgusting way.. You don't have to remind me of how shit and horrible that is, I know it well enough already, and I hate myself for it enough already. But I can't change for shit. It doesn't matter how many times I lay in bed, crying, regretting what I say, I never change.. I don't know what's his fault and what's my fault.. I just can't help but feel ignored and misunderstood by my partner. I just don't know.. I wish he listened to me more. He's so selfish and I hate that about him.. I don't understand why I can never reach a conclusion in an argument with him. He also almost never initiates anything, I have to be the one to kiss him and hug him first or he won't do it... But that doesn't excuse my disgusting behaviour.. I am never stable, one moment I'm fine the next I'm going crazy. One moment I hate him, then next time I hate myself. I really don't know anymore..
Even tho we try to communicate as best as we can, we argue and argue and argue. He puts his everything into making things work between us (well he at least says that..), while I completely fuck him and his heart over. (I wish he never met me.) And lately he's getting visibly more aggressive.. He could never get angry at me, never insult me, but i completely ruined him, and he's turning into a bigger and bigger asshole each time we argue. Being manipulative at times, calling me disgusting, saying I'm hurting him on purpose, saying I disappointed him. He calls his love for me naive, saying that however I fuck with him, he ends up loving me again anyways, and you can imagine how horribly that makes me feel.. Because I feel like he loves me against his will and would rather be alone.. It all ends by him being destroyed, unable to fall sleep till 6am, apologizing, withdrawing and then getting back, and me endlessly apologizing as much, being unable to breath, feeling my stomach turning and squeezing. And that all again, and again, and again, and again, and againandagainandagain AND AGAIN. None of us can leave the other. We seriously can't, even if we stopped talking for some time, we'd get back together in a few days.
Can this end? Can this hell please end? I really want to be happy, I want him to be as much happy, and I want us to be together.. Or is it maybe too late..? Is our relationship unfixable? Can we change for better? Am i demanding? How to become normal?
How to be happy together?
(Keep in mind we can't have couple therapy since he lives in a different country)
Thank you so much for your answers!! I'm sorry it's there are some mistakes but I'm extremely tired and I'd like to go to sleep.
submitted by Ryuhaneon to relationship_advice [link] [comments]


2020.10.25 02:41 Flcherrybomb Facebook appoints third party "oversight board" to be in charge of Censorship. Most have ties to Soros

I did the research for you. Facebook appointed a board of directors for its censorship board. They will hear cases And decide what is allowed on the platform and what is not. It will not be under the control of Mark Zuckerbergg
on the board are zero far-right conservatives. There is one open conservative who is only mildly conservative and nobody who supportedd President Trump or believes in free speech
Here is the list and various sources
.
.
Michael McConnell Professor and Director of the Constitutional Law Center Stanford Law School
The only open Conservative
Katherine Chen Professor National Chengchi University Taiwan
Jamal Greene Professor Columbia Law School
Served as an aide to Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) during Justice Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings when Harris stated that Kavanaugh was a “a direct and fundamental threat” to the Supreme Court’s promise to carry out justice fairly. United States of America
Helle Thorning-Schmidt Former Prime Minister Denmark
CEO of Save the Children International an organization partnered with Open Society Foundations. She additionally serves as a trustee of the International Crisis Group a group that George Soros funded originally and one where he and his son Alexander both serve as trustees alongside Helle.
One of at least six of the 15 international members of the board who openly espouse anti-Trump sentiments. She posted recently on Twitter over a photo of Obama endorsing presumptive Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden: “The endorsement!! OMG Miss the voice of decency and grace.” Denmark
Afia Asantewaa Asare-Kyei Program Manager Open Society Initiative for West Africa
Senegal & Ghana
Evelyn Aswad Professor and Chair University of Oklahoma College of Law United States of America
Tawakkol Karman Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Interview with the Spanish daily El Pais that she did “not trust Trump because I do not trust racist people.” Yemen
Julie Owono Executive Director Internet Sans Frontières Cameroon & France
Sudhir Krishnaswamy Vice Chancellor and Professor of Law National Law School of India University Sudhir Krishnaswamy also appears to have benefited from an Open Society grant
https://www3.wcl.american.edu/cni/0601/38457.html India
Nighat Dad Founder Digital Rights Foundation Pakistan
Alan Rusbridger Principal Lady Margaret Hall Oxford
Former Guardian Editor He tweeted in late March that the press should shut down President Donald Trump’s press conferences. “Completely agree that media should stop live broadcasting Trump especially since he rejects robust challenges from reporters.” This is Facebook’s new commitment to free speech. United Kingdom
Maina Kiai Director Human Rights Watch Global Alliances and Partnerships
Maina Kiai sits on the Advisory Board for the Human Rights Initiative of Soros' Open Society Foundations Kenya
Endy Bayuni Senior Editor and Board Member The Jakarta Post Indonesia
Andras Sajo former judge and vice president of the European Court of Human Rights
Ronaldo Lemos Professor Rio de Janeiro State University’s Law School remember of Mozilla Brazil
Emi Palmor Advocate and Lecturer Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya Israel Under her direction the Israeli justice ministry “petitioned Facebook to censor legitimate speech of human rights defenders and journalists because it was deemed politically undesirable ” Palestinian civil society groups stated this month. http://www.alhaq.org/advocacy/16865.html Israel
Pamela Karlan Professor Stanford Law School
Peter Baker a New York Times political writer described Karlan as “a full-throated unapologetic liberal torchbearer” https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/04/us/politics/pamela-karlan.html UnitedUnited States of America
Catalina Botero-Marino pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights funded by soros Open Society Foundations.Colombia
John Samples Vice President Cato Institute United States of America
Nicolas Suzor Professor School of Law at Queensland University of Technology
written that "neutrality" on social media platforms is "causing problems" and that "neutral tools that do not actively take inequality into account will almost inevitably contribute to the amplification of inequality." He even suggested that dissent from the Left's global warming positions could also be viewed as dangerous. "Racism misogyny and bigotry anti-vaccination content misinformation self-harm and climate change denial — all require difficult judgments about when one person’s speech is harmful to others."Australia
András Sajó University Professor Central European University
Held positions in Open Society organizations including on the Board of Directors of the Open Society Justice Initiative and is allegedly an old friend of Soros. Hungary
Thomas Hughes Oversight Board Executive Director Thomas Hughes comes from Article 19 which has received more than $2 million from Soros.
https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nb-staff/2020/05/07/free-speech-alliance-facebook-oversight-board-packed-liberals
http://abouthungary.hu/blog/introducing-facebooks-soros-oversight-board/
https://cms.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/05/facebook-puts-soros-muslim-brotherhood-activists-daniel-greenfield
https://www.oversightboard.com/meet-the-board/
https://www.mrc.org/freespeechalliance
submitted by Flcherrybomb to conspiracy [link] [comments]


2020.10.25 01:50 labormarket Modi and Macron should work together on reforming Islam and boost cooperation between France and India.

France and India are proposed to be a part of the D10, a group of 10 democratic large economies set to be a sort of enhanced G7.
Of this D10, France and India are the only countries have the Muslim % of their population over 10%. They are the only Democratic large economies in the world to face this vexing issue. Just as in France, India has trouble with its Muslim population.
The rest of the d10 do not fully understand this issue because domestically their Muslim % are much much lower. They think France and India can behave in the same way as they do without realizing France and India face a different environment than the other 8 countries.
I would like to see french and Indian policy makers build ties, working groups, etc to share strategies and best practices on how to handle the Islamic population in their respective countries. I believe these two countries would be natural allies in the coming years and decades.
What do French citizens think of India as a country and a strategic partner?
submitted by labormarket to france [link] [comments]


2020.10.24 20:41 arabpost Trump and Biden majorly differed in opinion in the final presidential debate

President Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Joe Biden on Thursday debated for the last time before Polling Day. They interacted on the general well-being and financial crises confronting the nation in what was a firmly more deliberate — however still on occasion banter became personal. The proceedings occurred in Nashville, Tenn., and were aided to some extent by a mute button that permitted every possibility to talk continuously for 2 minutes on every topic before the two men could begin the debate.
Trump indicated more discipline as the discussion opened, embracing a quieted tone as he handled questions on the Covid-19 in the beginning. Advisers had regretted that his aggressive approach in the primary debate, where he consistently intruded on Biden and tested arbitrator Chris Wallace, was inadequate and turned off unsure voters.
However, time and again, the two candidates have shown a clear dislike for each other. They have frequently attacked each other in the last ten days of the presidential campaign. During the first part of the final debate, Trump rehashed many of his typical excessively idealistic explanations regarding the trajectory of the infection, saying that new mounting cases would soon be “gone” and that a potential vaccine is on the way and would be accessible soon.
Trump in debate continued to downplay the seriousness of the disease and threat to public health crisis. However, predicted that soon there will be a vaccine which his own public health specialists have contradicted by stating that antibody vaccine would probable not be broadly available to the US citizens until next summer.
“It will disappear and I say we’re rounding the turn, we just round the corner. It is disappearing,” Trump stated about Covid-19, a comment that his administration’s own advisors have repudiated. “Anyone who’s answerable for not taking control … anyone who’s liable for the rising death toll ought not to remain on the chair of the president USA,” Biden slammed at the beginning of the discussion.
The two proceeded to fight over approach on medical care, climate change, immigration and law reform. Trump said that he would deliver a medical services plan that would eventually secure Americans with prior conditions but couldn’t provide any proof of any such plan, even as the Supreme Court assesses a case brought by his government to overturn the Affordable Care Act.
Trump confronted questions on his remarks censuring Black Lives Matter and his sharing of a video of a man yelling “white power.” He highlighted his government’s performance on criminal justice reform and rehashed his frequently utilized claims that he has supported Black Americans than any other president with the “conceivable exemption” of Abraham Lincoln. Biden referred to Trump’s restriction on movement from Muslim majority nations and his remarks during his first official run alluding to some Mexican immigrants as criminals and rapists.
The president was on the defensive over new reports on hundreds of migrant children and families that were separated at the border still aren’t able to unite with their loved ones. However, he caused more trouble for himself when he taunted immigrants who appear for court hearings have less IQ. “I would rather not say this — yet those with the least IQ, they may return,” Trump stated, seeming to acknowledge at the time the announcement could be dangerous.
The debate was generally disagreeable concerning the foreign business dealings of Hunter Biden, something the president’s partners have tried to make a focal point in the campaign. It was Biden who initially talked about Trump’s own lawyer Rudy Giuliani, blaming him for being a “Russian pawn” and accepting false data.
Trump at that point inclined toward the criticism of Hunter Biden over his business dealings and said that “He’s the VP of the United States and his son; his sibling and his other brother are becoming rich. They are similar to a vacuum cleaner,” Trump added. Biden argued that the comments against him and his family are part of a Russian disinformation plot, to which, Trump gave an expression disbelief.
A portion of Trump’s allies think that hitting on Biden over his family business dealings could bring down his popularity. However, other conservatives are concerned that the personal attacks are inconsequential to many voters and that Trump is misusing his time. Trump utilized his end comments to talk about policy, stating that if Biden comes to power, he would increase taxes and raise restrictions due to covid-19 which will impact the economy.
Wheras, Biden offered a message of solidarity and hope, saying that the character of United States is on the polls. The debate was Trump’s last significant opportunity battle Biden for the 2020 presidential campaign.
submitted by arabpost to usa [link] [comments]


2020.10.23 11:33 onlineastrologer8249 Find Out Best Astrologer in Mumbai @9776190123 or Visit- Tabij.in

Find Out Best Astrologer in Mumbai @9776190123 or Visit- Tabij.in


Are you looking for that last chance to struggle with your difficulties and overcome it? If the answer is yes it's time to immediately contact our Vashikaran Specialist in Mumbai. Vashikaran Specialist baba Ji Mumbai is here you State Maharashtra.
Our Best Astrologer in Mumbai let’s talk to anybody meeting personally and your problems and information are 100% confidential. 100% guaranteed to take the Pt. Sankar Tiwari Ji. Now Pandit Ji is telling you some attention to read it so you can help someone. Or maybe it should get you any help.

Vashikaran Specialist in Mumbai

Numbers of people are not successful in their love life. And they lost their lover. They try to get lost love back. Only one way is left for them to get their love back which is Vashikaran Specialist in Mumbai. With the help of this technique, you can get your lost love back. Our Astrologer in Mumbai is the only vashikaran specialist who can give you a mantra according to your Kundli in Mumbai. Best Vashikaran Specialist in Mumbai is a combination of the vashikaran mantra with his knowledge. Vashikaran Specialist Astrologer in Mumbai He has the power to close anyone which you want.

Love Problem Solution in Mumbai

Most of the time love is the creator of the Problems. Those who are not getting their true love they know the actual meaning of love or you can say one-sided lover, but the Love Problem Solution in Mumbai has the solution to it also. In the supervision of powerful Love Vashikaran Specialist Mumbai, you always get a positive response from the partner.

Marriage Problem Solution in Mumbai

Astrologer Specialist in Mumbai is one of the Famous astrologers in Mumbai, a specialist in Marriage Problem Solution, Love Relationship matter, Extramarital affairs Problems, Carrier Problem, Job Problem, and Finance Problem, black magic, child control, feuds and occasional problem solved in Mumbai.

Facilities we are providing

vashikaran specialist in Mumbai +91-9776190123
astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
best astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
love problem solution in Mumbai +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist Mumbai +91-9776190123
love marriage specialist in Mumbai +91-9776190123
black magic specialist in Mumbai +91-9776190123
love vashikaran specialist in Mumbai +91-9776190123
astrologer Mumbai +91-9776190123
astrologer navi Mumbai +91-9776190123
genuine astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
astrologer in mumbai central +91-9776190123
best astrologer in india mumbai Maharashtra +91-9776190123
best jyotish in Mumbai +91-9776190123
kundli astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
list of best astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
astrologer in bandra +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist in navi Mumbai +91-9776190123
best vashikaran specialist in Mumbai +91-9776190123
love problem solution Mumbai +91-9776190123
top astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
black magic specialist Mumbai +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist astrologer +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist in mumbai address +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist in mumbai bandra +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist pay after work +91-9776190123
famous astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
famous vashikaran specialist +91-9776190123
love marriage specialist Mumbai +91-9776190123
mumbai astrologer+91-9776190123
top 10 astrologers in Mumbai +91-9776190123
astrologers in Mumbai +91-9776190123
good astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
love marriage specialist baba ji Mumbai +91-9776190123
love problem solution astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
vashikaran expert in Mumbai +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist in thane +91-9776190123
best astrologer in navi Mumbai +91-9776190123
black magic expert in Mumbai +91-9776190123
genuine vashikaran specialist in Mumbai +91-9776190123
leading astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
love marriage specialist astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
love marriage specialist baba ji in Mumbai +91-9776190123
love problem specialist in Mumbai +91-9776190123
mumbai astrologer jyotish +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist baba ji in Mumbai +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist in mumbai borivali +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist near me +91-9776190123
astrologer in kharghar +91-9776190123
astrologer in Maharashtra +91-9776190123
astrologer near me +91-9776190123
best astrologer for vashikaran +91-9776190123
best astrologers in Mumbai +91-9776190123
best black magic specialist in Mumbai +91-9776190123
black magic removal in Mumbai +91-9776190123
black magic specialist in Maharashtra +91-9776190123
face reader astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
famous astrologer in navi Mumbai +91-9776190123
gemstone astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
love marriage specialist +91-9776190123
love vashikaran specialist +91-9776190123
muslim astrologer in Mumbai +91-9776190123
muslim vashikaran specialist in Mumbai +91-9776190123
vashikaran in Mumbai +91-9776190123
vashikaran specialist pay after results in Mumbai +91-9776190123
For further discussion you can consult our Genuine Astrologer in Mumbai by Calling on +91-9776190123 or Visit: Tabij.in
submitted by onlineastrologer8249 to u/onlineastrologer8249 [link] [comments]


2020.10.23 10:26 midnightverses For those who want to know why India 'loves' Israel?

Tho most people know about our good relationship some people and people who are not Israeli or Indian are ignorant of the relationship. I have seen claims that Indians support Israel due to their inferiority complex and because Israel is an enemy of Muslim Countries thus right wingers love Israel. No that is not true. As a left leaning person let me tell you why many more people love Israel due to reasons that are way deeper than that. It is true some right wingers support Israel due to them being against Islamic countries but way more neutral and left leaning people support Israel too. Me as a center-left person support Israel due to them being our major ally, defense and trade partner and a strong nation which have done very well despite the odds. Also I think Israelis are wonderful and hard-working people and I respect their pride in their ethnicity. There is also a lot of cultural exchange b/w Israel and India. Historically, India granted asylum to Jews and hence there was a large community of Kerela Jews living in India for centuries many of whom migrated after formation of Israel. The government of Israel even thanked India for being the only country not to persecute Jews. Also both our countries support each other on major fronts and can in the future be effective in the fight against Islamic terrorism and growth in science and technology. Breaking it community wise India is a secular and tolerant country (largely) and Hindus doesn't care what religion a person is. Even Indian Muslims are Pro-Israel (moderate ones) with generation of Muslim families looking after Synagogues in WB. So no, it is not an inferiority complex but a relationship built on trust, culture and strategic benefit. If you think Indians are obsessed with Israel that is not true. Israel is considered kind of an underdog. Despite being a small nation with not many allies and being surrounded with enemies, It can still stand up for itself is a fact that is very respected here (P.S everyone loves an underdog lol). Any other obsession is just our over-hospitality lol. Israel and India are good friends and I hope we keep growing together!
submitted by midnightverses to Israel [link] [comments]


2020.10.23 02:20 chopper45 How do I get out?! I've been dependent for so long!

OMG I never realized how much I let my parents use me like a doormat. I literally have no control over my life! I am 23 hijabi with legit not savings, no job, no car and a useless degree. I have no real knowledge of adult life. My family mentally exhausted me with their fights, their stubborness, and plain smallmindedness. Now I'm considering moving out to start new and go back to school, go into debt, and live with a partner. All because I never realized how crazy my family truly is.
Every calamity/mistake I made was fed with advice to pray to Allah for help or because it was my fault that I didn't learn to make as much money or study hard like my siblings. I have undiagnosed ADD. Instead, I am now suffering social awkwardness because of strict socialization with only other Muslims. I have no friends, little prospective success in my current career and severe depression/anxiety. I've never felt so betrayed by my environment.
And every second I waste with them it just gets worse. I WANT OUT! I'm being guilted by my parents as a disgrace to the family. I don't even care about debt. I just want to breathe and feel like my life is going somewhere.
I want to stop making excuses to not leave bc of covid. I want to just believe I can go and survive as an adult and not be so damn afraid anymore.
submitted by chopper45 to exmuslim [link] [comments]