Autonomy App
@autonomyapp.bsky.social
Building Autonomy, a grassroots local democracy app.
Help shape the future of local democracy, take the survey in my link. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe3EjNmyak4HTyR4U7ZJLevJwFtnFIw0ESdxX4II0rrWVV-oA/viewform?usp=header
Your Voice Matters.
Help shape the future of local democracy, take the survey in my link. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe3EjNmyak4HTyR4U7ZJLevJwFtnFIw0ESdxX4II0rrWVV-oA/viewform?usp=header
Your Voice Matters.
archive.ph
Paste the link and read for free
Paste the link and read for free
archive.ph
January 17, 2026 at 12:17 PM
archive.ph
Paste the link and read for free
Paste the link and read for free
Mr. Young looks miserable…no rest for the wicked, eh.
I rather be poor and happy than have a soul pickled in piss.
I rather be poor and happy than have a soul pickled in piss.
January 17, 2026 at 11:56 AM
Mr. Young looks miserable…no rest for the wicked, eh.
I rather be poor and happy than have a soul pickled in piss.
I rather be poor and happy than have a soul pickled in piss.
Captured suggests he was in the run, seized is like a car when the finance isn’t paid.
January 6, 2026 at 1:50 PM
Captured suggests he was in the run, seized is like a car when the finance isn’t paid.
Does he have a profile on this platform?
He sounds like he’s worth following
He sounds like he’s worth following
January 6, 2026 at 1:25 PM
Does he have a profile on this platform?
He sounds like he’s worth following
He sounds like he’s worth following
Maybe they checked Maduro’s social media and didn’t like what they saw?
When questioned Maduro said…
“Release the Epstein files”
When questioned Maduro said…
“Release the Epstein files”
January 3, 2026 at 1:20 PM
Maybe they checked Maduro’s social media and didn’t like what they saw?
When questioned Maduro said…
“Release the Epstein files”
When questioned Maduro said…
“Release the Epstein files”
He was a QC, that’s what lawyers do
January 3, 2026 at 1:09 PM
He was a QC, that’s what lawyers do
Blaming a 1st-century Jew for later Christian atrocities is neither historical nor serious.
I’m done engaging with insults.
I’m done engaging with insults.
December 30, 2025 at 6:29 PM
Blaming a 1st-century Jew for later Christian atrocities is neither historical nor serious.
I’m done engaging with insults.
I’m done engaging with insults.
You’re asserting, not demonstrating.
Jewish sources don’t contradict the existence of Temple-era economic coercion they document elite control. Disagreeing with a Gospel interpretation doesn’t magically render all criticism “verifiably untrue.”
Rejecting sources because you dislike them, ha!
Jewish sources don’t contradict the existence of Temple-era economic coercion they document elite control. Disagreeing with a Gospel interpretation doesn’t magically render all criticism “verifiably untrue.”
Rejecting sources because you dislike them, ha!
December 30, 2025 at 6:26 PM
You’re asserting, not demonstrating.
Jewish sources don’t contradict the existence of Temple-era economic coercion they document elite control. Disagreeing with a Gospel interpretation doesn’t magically render all criticism “verifiably untrue.”
Rejecting sources because you dislike them, ha!
Jewish sources don’t contradict the existence of Temple-era economic coercion they document elite control. Disagreeing with a Gospel interpretation doesn’t magically render all criticism “verifiably untrue.”
Rejecting sources because you dislike them, ha!
Hadrian is a good example, Jews reject him morally, not historically. Rejection doesn’t erase relevance.
December 30, 2025 at 6:21 PM
Hadrian is a good example, Jews reject him morally, not historically. Rejection doesn’t erase relevance.
Saying “verifiably untrue” doesn’t make it so.
You’re objecting to Christian theological claims, not to the historical facts that Jesus was a Jew, subject to Jewish law and tradition, and was seen by contemporaries as a Jewish teacher. Those points aren’t polemic, they’re historical consensus.
You’re objecting to Christian theological claims, not to the historical facts that Jesus was a Jew, subject to Jewish law and tradition, and was seen by contemporaries as a Jewish teacher. Those points aren’t polemic, they’re historical consensus.
December 30, 2025 at 6:21 PM
Saying “verifiably untrue” doesn’t make it so.
You’re objecting to Christian theological claims, not to the historical facts that Jesus was a Jew, subject to Jewish law and tradition, and was seen by contemporaries as a Jewish teacher. Those points aren’t polemic, they’re historical consensus.
You’re objecting to Christian theological claims, not to the historical facts that Jesus was a Jew, subject to Jewish law and tradition, and was seen by contemporaries as a Jewish teacher. Those points aren’t polemic, they’re historical consensus.
“Den of robbers” is Jewish prophetic language critiquing Temple corruption, not a Christian attack on Judaism. Pointing that out isn’t antisemitic, it’s historical.
December 30, 2025 at 6:15 PM
“Den of robbers” is Jewish prophetic language critiquing Temple corruption, not a Christian attack on Judaism. Pointing that out isn’t antisemitic, it’s historical.
Torah permission doesn’t make Temple practice immune from abuse.
Jesus isn’t disputing the law, he’s using Jewish prophetic language to condemn a system that had become exploitative in practice. That critique exists inside Judaism, not against it.
Jesus isn’t disputing the law, he’s using Jewish prophetic language to condemn a system that had become exploitative in practice. That critique exists inside Judaism, not against it.
December 30, 2025 at 6:14 PM
Torah permission doesn’t make Temple practice immune from abuse.
Jesus isn’t disputing the law, he’s using Jewish prophetic language to condemn a system that had become exploitative in practice. That critique exists inside Judaism, not against it.
Jesus isn’t disputing the law, he’s using Jewish prophetic language to condemn a system that had become exploitative in practice. That critique exists inside Judaism, not against it.
By that standard, Moses was “just some guy,” the prophets were “just some guys,” and Judaism itself becomes a collection of irrelevant polemics. You don’t get to erase historical figures by declaring their relevance retroactively.
December 30, 2025 at 6:11 PM
By that standard, Moses was “just some guy,” the prophets were “just some guys,” and Judaism itself becomes a collection of irrelevant polemics. You don’t get to erase historical figures by declaring their relevance retroactively.
You’re confusing administration with identity.
The West Bank being under Jordanian control from 1948–67 doesn’t negate Palestinian nationhood any more than British rule negated Indian identity. The claim simply doesn’t follow.
The West Bank being under Jordanian control from 1948–67 doesn’t negate Palestinian nationhood any more than British rule negated Indian identity. The claim simply doesn’t follow.
December 30, 2025 at 6:08 PM
You’re confusing administration with identity.
The West Bank being under Jordanian control from 1948–67 doesn’t negate Palestinian nationhood any more than British rule negated Indian identity. The claim simply doesn’t follow.
The West Bank being under Jordanian control from 1948–67 doesn’t negate Palestinian nationhood any more than British rule negated Indian identity. The claim simply doesn’t follow.
Not shady? To be told your sacrifice isn’t sanctioned so you must buy an approved one through the Temple and with coin from the Temple changers.
It wasn’t labour or trade that angered Jesus. It was a captive, exploitative system operating inside the Temple courts.
“You have made it a den of robbers”
It wasn’t labour or trade that angered Jesus. It was a captive, exploitative system operating inside the Temple courts.
“You have made it a den of robbers”
December 30, 2025 at 6:01 PM
Not shady? To be told your sacrifice isn’t sanctioned so you must buy an approved one through the Temple and with coin from the Temple changers.
It wasn’t labour or trade that angered Jesus. It was a captive, exploitative system operating inside the Temple courts.
“You have made it a den of robbers”
It wasn’t labour or trade that angered Jesus. It was a captive, exploitative system operating inside the Temple courts.
“You have made it a den of robbers”
My mistake, money changers, for a fee. All four canonical gospels explicitly describe money changers and merchants in the Temple (Mark 11:15, Matthew 21:12, Luke 19:45, John 2:14–16). This is a Second Temple practice tied to approved sacrificial commerce, not a medieval invention.
You pay to pray.
You pay to pray.
December 29, 2025 at 11:15 AM
My mistake, money changers, for a fee. All four canonical gospels explicitly describe money changers and merchants in the Temple (Mark 11:15, Matthew 21:12, Luke 19:45, John 2:14–16). This is a Second Temple practice tied to approved sacrificial commerce, not a medieval invention.
You pay to pray.
You pay to pray.
Yes, that post is implying Palestine and Palestinians didn’t exist. It confuses sovereignty with existence. Being ruled by Jordan didn’t erase Palestinian identity any more than British rule erased Indians or Kenyans. National identity doesn’t switch on and off depending on who controls the border.
December 29, 2025 at 10:52 AM
Yes, that post is implying Palestine and Palestinians didn’t exist. It confuses sovereignty with existence. Being ruled by Jordan didn’t erase Palestinian identity any more than British rule erased Indians or Kenyans. National identity doesn’t switch on and off depending on who controls the border.
The money changers episode predates Constantine and the Catholic Church by centuries. It happened in Second Temple Jerusalem. Jesus was Jewish, his followers were Jewish, and his anger was aimed at religious corruption and profit.
Please learn history!
Please learn history!
December 29, 2025 at 10:48 AM
The money changers episode predates Constantine and the Catholic Church by centuries. It happened in Second Temple Jerusalem. Jesus was Jewish, his followers were Jewish, and his anger was aimed at religious corruption and profit.
Please learn history!
Please learn history!
But under whose orders and why?
Man preaches on a mount, who cares but start tipping money lenders tables in the temple, that’s trouble the priests won’t allow…
How backwards is that?
Man preaches on a mount, who cares but start tipping money lenders tables in the temple, that’s trouble the priests won’t allow…
How backwards is that?
December 29, 2025 at 12:08 AM
But under whose orders and why?
Man preaches on a mount, who cares but start tipping money lenders tables in the temple, that’s trouble the priests won’t allow…
How backwards is that?
Man preaches on a mount, who cares but start tipping money lenders tables in the temple, that’s trouble the priests won’t allow…
How backwards is that?
It’s a British minted coin because Britain governed a territory called Palestine. That doesn’t prove a state, but it absolutely proves the place existed. Arguing otherwise is semantic gymnastics.
December 28, 2025 at 11:19 PM
It’s a British minted coin because Britain governed a territory called Palestine. That doesn’t prove a state, but it absolutely proves the place existed. Arguing otherwise is semantic gymnastics.
Here’s a bit of evidence to say Palestine has been around for a long time…
December 28, 2025 at 11:44 AM
Here’s a bit of evidence to say Palestine has been around for a long time…
Here is a part of history that cannot be denied…who would mint a coin for a place that doesn’t exist?
Nobody, that’s who…
#Palestine #Israel #History
Nobody, that’s who…
#Palestine #Israel #History
December 28, 2025 at 11:32 AM
Here is a part of history that cannot be denied…who would mint a coin for a place that doesn’t exist?
Nobody, that’s who…
#Palestine #Israel #History
Nobody, that’s who…
#Palestine #Israel #History