BruceVC

Volo sorry to criticize you on this but you have a real lack of loyalty or respect towards Britain...and you Canadian. Dont you think after everything the UK has done for Canada you could show a little gratitude?

We call this Freedom. WOD I have a suggestion that you have probably considered but then thought it was silly You have always been honest about your issues with the current state of the USA but what your view may be unintentionally missing is maybe you just need a change of scenery for a while. Now I respect your open patriotism to Texas but I am talking about a sabbatical for 6-12 months. But you need to go somewhere like California, somewhere where someone like Hurlshot lives who is positive about the USA I think 12 months living in California will change or maybe lesson some of your negative views?

That is exactly what people say who want people to think they have a high IQ !!!

I would like to get to the bottom of this whole email scandal because many people do share your view and I also want clarity For me if she intentionally deleted data that would incriminate her of course I wouldn't ignore this and I would stop supporting her But the evidence just doesn't support this, now I will go into more details so my point is clear. So take a look at this link and tell me what you dont agree with if you dont mind http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/27/politics/hillary-clinton-personal-email-server/index.html There is no question in my mind she is covering up something criminal. She had those servers professionally wiped. You are more than familiar with IT, you know what that means. And she only did that AFTER she lost in court and was compelled to turn them over. This IS a cover up. No questions about it. Now WHAT is being covered up is a question. I think, my opinion only, the deleted documents refer to donations made to the Clinton Foundation from foreign interests who received favorable treatment from the State Dept during her tenure. Then there is this quote: "But she "has maintained and preserved copies" of work-related, or potentially work-related emails she turned over to the State Department late last year." So we are to accept the word of a potential criminal defendant that the evidence they destroyed was not germane to their case? Only in the Democrat Party would that fly. Here is a homework assignment for you Bruce. Do a little reading about a business called Uranium One and how it came into being and then tell me if you think everything is above board on that. Okay but lets focus on one thing at a time if you dont mind so we can create a foundation of common agreement So based on the link I posted do you agree She handed over 55,000 emails and 30, 000 she said could be for public viewing She also admitted deleting only personal emails which is fine Now I'm not sure if you aware but when people delete data it can normally always be recovered using data recovery software Here is a link explaining this http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/us/politics/investigators-find-emails-hillary-clinton-said-were-erased.html?_r=0 So the FBI was able to view all data she attempted to delete and they found nothing incriminating? Professionally wiped Bruce. She didn't "right-click-delete". The data on those servers, that I will remind you was the property of the United States, was professionally destroyed. As for the e-mails she handed over we now have only her word that was all the "work" e-mails she had. Let's say I was the number one suspect in a murder that was committed using a caliber of weapon I was known to own. Now let's I was compelled to surrender that weapon for testing and I fought hard not to do it. And when I did the police found I had replaced the barrel and firing pin. Would that arouse any suspicions? Another thing Bruce, the FBI has made no recommendations yet. This is an ongoing investigation. You seem to think it's all wrapped up. It's not. Okay so just to add something important, I mentioned to you I work with eDiscovery software for living. So we sell, consult and implement this software for corporations mostly in the financial sector. This doesnt make me an expert on what Hilary did and why but I do understand the correct legal and technical requirements So in this case a couple of facts about how these things technically work ...you can decide if they relevant For me, you and about 99 % of the world it would be impossible for us to delete data completely from any disk drive. The reality is there are expensive solutions that can be used to recover most data because there is residual resonance left on the magnetic disk drive or solid state drive always.This is not data that can be read by a PC but for example the best data recovery solutions will freeze a disk in liquid nitrogen and then they can use a laser to recover that data. I have seen this, so unless Hilary knew some hardcore developers or hackers and I mean hardcore any data she deleted thinking it was gone was merely inaccessible to computer technology. But not the FBI who would have been pedantic about getting this back Also the method I mentioned is not 100 % full proof but with email audits you can always see missing data as there are obvious gaps in the sequence of email flow. So for example lets say she didnt delete the data but actually copied if off ( which is always the better way ) the FBI would have noticed certain gaps where there was no email. It is actually obvious when you use software that allows you to see the chain of custody of email flow So in closing I still cannot assume she lied or intentionally deleted data to cover up wrong doing because it would have honestly been recoverable ?

I would like to get to the bottom of this whole email scandal because many people do share your view and I also want clarity For me if she intentionally deleted data that would incriminate her of course I wouldn't ignore this and I would stop supporting her But the evidence just doesn't support this, now I will go into more details so my point is clear. So take a look at this link and tell me what you dont agree with if you dont mind http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/27/politics/hillary-clinton-personal-email-server/index.html There is no question in my mind she is covering up something criminal. She had those servers professionally wiped. You are more than familiar with IT, you know what that means. And she only did that AFTER she lost in court and was compelled to turn them over. This IS a cover up. No questions about it. Now WHAT is being covered up is a question. I think, my opinion only, the deleted documents refer to donations made to the Clinton Foundation from foreign interests who received favorable treatment from the State Dept during her tenure. Then there is this quote: "But she "has maintained and preserved copies" of work-related, or potentially work-related emails she turned over to the State Department late last year." So we are to accept the word of a potential criminal defendant that the evidence they destroyed was not germane to their case? Only in the Democrat Party would that fly. Here is a homework assignment for you Bruce. Do a little reading about a business called Uranium One and how it came into being and then tell me if you think everything is above board on that. Okay but lets focus on one thing at a time if you dont mind so we can create a foundation of common agreement So based on the link I posted do you agree She handed over 55,000 emails and 30, 000 she said could be for public viewing She also admitted deleting only personal emails which is fine Now I'm not sure if you aware but when people delete data it can normally always be recovered using data recovery software Here is a link explaining this http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/23/us/politics/investigators-find-emails-hillary-clinton-said-were-erased.html?_r=0 So the FBI was able to view all data she attempted to delete and they found nothing incriminating?

I would like to get to the bottom of this whole email scandal because many people do share your view and I also want clarity For me if she intentionally deleted data that would incriminate her of course I wouldn't ignore this and I would stop supporting her But the evidence just doesn't support this, now I will go into more details so my point is clear. So take a look at this link and tell me what you dont agree with if you dont mind http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/27/politics/hillary-clinton-personal-email-server/index.html

This is normally exactly what people say who dont have a high IQ !!! GD dont be a hater Hey, I'm sure mine could boil water.... as long as we're using the right scale! My personal experience with so called high IQ is other types of insights are needed to somehow make it meaningful ...and most so called high IQ people dont have those other insights

That part about imprisoning people who say racist things comes to mind. Okay now thats a good example where I would never guess So that point I made is uniquely SA, I did say its not something that would be accepted in the USA

I hope this is not aimed at me, I am trying to avoid it as much as I can But dude, at least finish what you want to say For example I understand someone ignoring me but what you tend to do is what others do. You will criticize me on some level and when I genuinely ask you for an example ....you dont respond ? So I'm just asking for consistency or rather not say anything about me

Thanks GD, those are very kind words Yes, I am often surprised by how people have this negative view of me. I know why some people " dislike " me and its because my view on certain topics I wont comprise on. For example there is a reason the West and places like the USA and the EU are the most successful and progressive places in the world. Its not because " white people run those countries " thats just because of the history of Europe. Its because Western countries have realized certain core values, institutions and policies provide for the best overall systems of governments and lead to there citizens having a good quality of life ...but people like Drowsy or Zora believe that the West are hypocrites and there hegemony is some false reality That doesn't bother me, I have heard the same anti-Western views since 9/11 ...and its all BS and based on hyperbole But the people on this thread who think I'm an idiot or a troll will never explain what they mean or give examples. But end of the day I want to engage with people who want to have a debate ..like you. Its not personal and even though we not agree on certain things I learn things all the time But I really dont have the energy or interest to have a debate with people who feel I am this enigmatic troll But what would be an example of someone assuming I'm trying to get a rise from them, what do I say that creates this view ?

This is normally exactly what people say who dont have a high IQ !!! GD dont be a hater

I'm pretty sure it's a mix of long-since debunked crookery and outright lies. The source with the lowest estimated average IQ I could find for African blacks puts them at 82, and a lot of research into the average intelligence of Asians was either made with tests from the '50s (which are considerably easier than today's versions, because average intelligence is actually on the rise, but the tests have to be re-calibrated so 100 represents the average), or used samples heavily skewed towards upper-income households (and, after controlling for socioeconomic factors, the difference consequently disappeared). I dont put much real credibility in high IQ in the sense there can be an assumption " this person is clever than other people, he has an automatic advantage in the work place " When I was in grade 7 myself and 2 other kids were selected as " potential high IQ " I went through a series of unusual tests conducted by this taciturn and phlegmatic lady assessor . I even remember the one test was reading a story and then she asked me questions about what I just read, its weird I remember the story even now Anyway we were selected and told " we are sending you 3 kids during your school holidays to a special school so you dont waste your talents " So I spent 10 days of my holiday at another school...I hated it as I always found myself unconformable amongst boys I never knew at that age When we left school there was tacit view " the world was our oyster because we had high IQ " Out of the 3 of us....one guy was killed 4 years later because of a drug debt and the other guy just couldn't hold any job for longer than 2 months . Years later he told me he had been abused as a child at a caravan park and never went for counseling so it had deep psychological impact on him as an adult And me ? I have no idea if it helped me ....I realize I think about things differently than most and some people who meet me say I'm eccentric but as far as being intelligent ? What does that even mean nowadays and does it matter in most things in RL?

You must tell me who these " cool headed " members are who get aggressive with me? I want to know who they are because the only people who seem to get aggressive are people who either dont understand my point or just dont like my opinion...and thats normally because they dont like admitting they wrong So what is your definition of " cool headed " ?

Who's the bigger nitwit, Trump Bruce or (we) the people who keep engaging with and/or insulting him? The people who engage him. It's clear by now he's either a troll or an idiot, either way it's a waste of time. Anyways someone on Trump's staff browses /pol/ It took me a while to understand the connection with the star, very subtle indeed. Who's the bigger nitwit, Trump Bruce or (we) the people who keep engaging with and/or insulting him? The people who engage him. It's clear by now he's either a troll or an idiot, either way it's a waste of time. Anyways someone on Trump's staff browses /pol/ Hey if you guys want me to screw off, I can take the hint. Don't ever let your conscience for posting be in the hands of approval of others, just keep on truckin'. Meshugger you interest me, sometimes you say things that come across as bizarre or not really grounded in reality but yet you have more empathy than most people realize. You were nice to young Sadie when she made some points that were a little naive but are normal for a 16 year old ....most people on this forum were rude to her but I'm not sure she was real or not .....I had my doubts And you do go out your to sometimes say hings like " a forum is not about others peoples support of your posts " and I appreciate that kind of kindness which is rare on an established forum like this

I thought you may see this is a negative....yes we saying you dont have a high IQ but that doesn't mean we dont value your comments

Who's the bigger nitwit, Trump Bruce or (we) the people who keep engaging with and/or insulting him? The people who engage him. It's clear by now he's either a troll or an idiot, either way it's a waste of time. Anyways someone on Trump's staff browses /pol/ Hey if you guys want me to screw off, I can take the hint. No need to be put off, I want to debate with you. You are about as capable of debating as Helen Keller is at driving a car. Well use that energy to get involved in the next email scandal debate I want to have with GD Because I have realized this whole email issue has not been settled and I have new links to share

Who's the bigger nitwit, Trump Bruce or (we) the people who keep engaging with and/or insulting him? The people who engage him. It's clear by now he's either a troll or an idiot, either way it's a waste of time. Anyways someone on Trump's staff browses /pol/ Hey if you guys want me to screw off, I can take the hint. No need to be put off, I want to debate with you. I just ask you debate in good faith which means if you have a question or issue with me and I respond then please respond back But we have been debating like that lately?

But for example watch this video He makes highly inaccurate generalizations about Liberals, he says Liberals dont like Capitalism and justify the fall of the USSR Now this is not accurate at all...so why would he say this? This is his interpretation because of the social discourse between the political parties in the USA but even then its not accurate. How many Democrats dont believe in Capitalism or would admire the USSR?

Who's the bigger nitwit, Trump Bruce or (we) the people who keep engaging with and/or insulting him? There's a saying that applies here: 'Fool me once, shame on you. fool me twice, shame on me.' Many here are way past twice... Trump is not stupid, thats definitely not true But that doesnt mean his political strategy will work or he has not made several terrible decisions in his attempts to be the Predisential choice ....for me the worst thing he has done is alienate the minorities, short term objective to appeal to some Republican sentiments. But this will cost him the final election and he will have no one else but himself to blame Minorities vote Democrat, because they largely support big government, and being the Republican candidate, he can't exactly overtly promise more government. Trump is trying for the white vote, and he has the highest support for a republican amongst blacks in forever, mostly because of his anti-immigration stance. So many people outside of the USA typically have completely misunderstood the rise of Trump and what it means...and it has been a complicated affair that confuses even Americans I was confused for several weeks but now I understand but to give you an example this is what people outside the USA may think and remember certain will always be negative about the USA Most people : are just shocked and concerned as they only see the Trump rhetoric and think he is racist. But basically everything Trump has said or done has been strategic Some people : " This just confirms what white Americans really think, they racist" Now I always correct this view because 11 million white people voted for Trump but there are 200 million white people in the USA ....its unfair attack on white people Muslims in SA : They already think the USA wants to destroy Islam so now they faced with open Islamophobia and realize things can get worse Some White Men in SA : Trump is right .....this is exactly what the USA needs !!! These white people have issues with various minorities and love the fact Trump is able to insult groups they have been forced to recognize ...like women Most women in SA : Just think he is terrible .....terrible Some religious groups in SA : They do think Islam is a religion of violence and is backward so any anti-Muslim rhetoric works Me : Trump represents a low bar for white people. I understand why many white Americans feel the USA under Obama has lost its way, I dont agree with that view but my view is obviously my view, but this blind support for everything Trump says has surprised me. He has said many things that just take white men backwards ....not forwards. For example when did we think its okay to make public and crude personal attacks on women?

So I consider you someone who absolutely can discern whats relevant and ignore whats not real But there are people like Vals who really believe what he says and thats where I have my issue. He panders to certain spurious and misinterpreted views that people on the Internet have about topics like " liberals " In RL what is wrong with being a liberal, I consider myself a liberal in RL yet he is basically saying I'm a fake and a hypocrite

I know you support some of his views and there is nothing wrong with that as you will naturally agree with some of what he says, thats normal. It doesnt mean you are a racist But for example, when did IQ become relevant? You are born with a high IQ...and I find it hard to be only White and Asian races can be born with high IQ? But it was his view on SA that really annoyed me....trust me it was biased and had many racist undertones

Have you read the books? They simply the finest fantasy I have ever read and they add a different and better insight into the characters and overall narrative

Funny enough this makes sense, they are very similar in many ways Neither Putin or Edrogan care much about things like human rights rights do not exist anywhere in the world. all we have are privileges that our leaders allow us to have and that they can revoke any time. the difference between countries like russia, turkey, china and countries like US of the members of EU, is that the former don't need to cook up a convenient excuse first. So in the past I would have ignored these types of comments as anti-Western propaganda But since you live in the EU I would like to try to give you a more positive view on things because anyone aligned to the West understands the pressure on the EU and I am very committed to the EU but end of the day you also want EU citizens to believe in it If you dont mind sharing what privileges have you lost or how do you feel you are being treated unfairly?

First of all the FBI has decided nothing of the sort. And they can't charge her. All they can do is recommend a charge to the United States Attorney General. Who just had a "secret" meeting with Bill Clinton which no reporters or photographers were allowed to see. Do you REALLY think they were talking about their grandchildren? Except that it's not how it works. The FBI (or any other Federal law enforcement agency seeking a federal indictment) works together with the prosecutor (U.S. Attorney's Office) who presents the evidence to a federal grand jury --which makes the judgment to indict based on whether there is enough evidence for the accused to have committed the crime. The Attorney General is not part of the process and it would not be ethical for her to be involved with the process, and she has EXPLICITLY stated that she will not be part of the process. That's contrary to everything I've read on the subject. She would decide if the case was presented to the grand jury to start with, no? Which begs the question from where and from whom have you read regarding the subject matter? Look, we have senior career FBI agents, analysts, other specialists, and their supervisors making sure the investigation is done by the book and as thorough as possible. To which they are working directly with the jurisdictional U.S. Attorney's office -- led by a career senior Assistant U.S. Attorney (if not the chief of the division), and a team of AUSA's and paralegals, and with support of the U.S. Attorney. The U.S. Attorney General is not going to overrule her U.S. Attorney. These guys and gals know what they're doing and don't mess around. If they believe there is enough evidence of criminal wrongdoing, they will present it to the Grand Jury seeking an indictment. Federal cases going to court have a 92% conviction rate. If they don't believe they have enough evidence, neither the FBI or the USAO will seek an indictment. Pure and simple. The AG is not part of the decision making process. WOD, this whole incident actually should be about one question " did Hilary delete that data to hide something criminal " ...everything else can be explained. I dont think she deleted that data to hide something criminal but perhaps something embarrassing

Volo !!! Thats a terrible thing to say