Gromnir

again, they weren't lying. blix were convinced it weren't lies... in fact, he compared to witch hunters in oldie europe. just as the witch hunters believed there were an epidemic o' witches and saw every bit o' evidence as convincing and definitive proof, so too did the Americans believe saddam possessed nukes. sure, some witch hunter may have known they were frauds, but not most o' 'em. this is one o' those conspiracies which has been disproven, but the problem is the same witch hunter mentality exists in the conspiracy folks. can't take those government reports serious 'cause the government lies, right? take bits o' evidence which any kinda application o' critical thinking would conclude high confidence in absence o' a conspiracy and instead the witch hunters see opposite. the bigger problem is they (the Administration,) most o' them, were aware o' the tribalism which woulda' made a kinda spontaneous unification in iraq utter implausible. after the fact we know just how much the administration were being warned o' the tribalism problem, and yet... *shrug* they literal knew their force calculations for post invasion were off by at least a factor o' three. obama indulged similar stoopid. when arab spring were happening and the obama administration were promoting regime change in the middle east, all his experts were telling the administration just how badly such change would end w/o guidance including huge investments o' US dollars. obama had even less excuse for indulging fantasy 'cause o' iraq. the difference is obama were acting more clandestine and and as such he weren't trying to shine on the public, but if that difference makes you feel better, we question your sanity. HA! Good Fun!

the wmd conspiracy bit persists. not a conspiracy. were garden variety stoopid. am not sure how blix always gets listed as a source for the conspiracy theory folks 'cause we heard him speak at berkeley and he pushed back on the notion o' conspiracy. blix observed how even he believed saddam had wmds as late as december 2002, and he were hardly convinced otherwise in early spring o' 2003... recognized how saddam not having wmd and yet refusing to allow inspections when the alternative were imminent invasion were utter unreasonable. nevertheless, a few o' our resident tinfoil hat brigade cite blix as support for a wmd conspiracy when he represents opposite unless taken complete outta context. christiane amanpour gave blix multiple opportunities to throw bush under the bus. blix wouldn't do it. the un inspector were deliberate pushing back on notion the US and brits had some kinda ill intent in promoting the wmd narrative. from blix pov, because US military and intelligence already believed saddam had wmd, they looked at every bit o' evidence as solid proof o' such a danger when in fact the evidence were dubious at best. US wanted an excuse to invade and they genuine believed, in spite o' suspect evidence, that saddam had wmds. no conspiracy, but perhaps worse as it reveals how in spite o' obvious human and monetary costs o' an invasion and occupation o' iraq, there were little critical thinking and reflection from folks in the bush administration. curious though, blix singled out bush as almost the singular senior American defending the the wmd investigations. video o' the interview may exist. were from way back in 2004. edit: btw, the wmd not-conspiracy distracts from the more costly but less salacious genuine conspiracy o' iraq: the misleading projected costs of occupation. us military and intelligence knowing vast undersold the manpower and money requirements for occupation and rebuild o' iraq. bush administration knew the more conservative estimates on manpower and dollar costs, but they pretended as if iraq would magical transform post liberation and take 'pon themselves the herculean tasks o' security and rebuild. HA! Good Fun!

zerohedge is popular 'mongst the eastern europeans who post prolific. no doubt is a fave site oft recommended by dipssh!t uncle quarterly. which reminds us... is not a criticism o' eastern europeans btw. many o' those nations got a history o' victimization at the hands o' state run media and they got a healthy distrust o' any official seeming news source. is nevertheless curious how distrust o' media somehow results in many folks glomping onto fringe theories and outlier sources. one would think such cynicism would make a person more suspicious o' unsubstantiated rando "news" stories. am not gonna again post bs receptivity articles, but is a fascinating bit o' contradiction that the self-described hardcore cynics is so often the folks wallowing in conspiracy theory. HA! Good Fun!

Facebook added a label to Trump's post claiming that voting by mail will lead to a 'CORRUPT ELECTION' trump is different. point to history o' US elections ignores the scope o' trump's disregard for the norms gd identifies. trump don't read history. trump don't care 'bout history save for when it is convenient. trump is constant looking for ways to get around the Constitution. to take comfort in the constitution and history is, after 3.5 years o' trump, looking increasing naive. gd looks at situation odd. we see such media stories and am not least bit surprised by trump behaviour or the possibility he will fight to his last breath to keep his grip on the resolute desk. trump knows there is gonna be a considerable number o' democrats looking to criminalize his behaviour once he is no longer President and the doj is no longer able to say they are prevented from pursuit o' prosecutions. we question the wisdom o' such prosecutions, but for a guy who is constant complaining 'bout witch hunts, a 2021 with democrat controlled Congress and Presidency is no doubt a nightmare scenario. only thing which continues to disappoint us is the silence. after +3 years o' trump, we are rare shocked by the President and no violation o' rule o' law or public trust is too far outta reach for him. is silence from trump supporters which bothers us. trump voters and his senate supporters is not outraged by trump facebook and twitter tirades. they ain't bothered by portland or even muslim bans. those few who is bothered ain't bothered enough to do other than suggest is just trump being trump? how is it possible to look at what is happening in 2020 and then feel comforted by the previous near 250 years o' US history? HA! Good Fun!

A Navy vet asked federal officers in Portland to remember their oaths. Then they broke his hand.

they are cheering trump so loud they don't hear warnings from folks such as Gromnir. "always consider these kinda moves when used as a weapon pointed at something/somebody you cherish." too many second amendment ppl ignore the danger inherent in giving near absolute authority to one person, a person who next election, or election after, may not share their viewpoint. and am disagreeing with gd as usual. is not government which is a rabid dog. conspiracy 'bout deep state nonsense aside, the federal government is just an organizational scheme and +200 years o' history makes obvious the scheme may be used beneficial or malicious. mostly government grinds along unnoticed doing hundreds o' things unseen w/o any ill will to motivate it. attribute some kinda fundamental flaw to government is transparent shirking o' responsibility. trump, as a prime example, don't have an ideology. he is doing what he believes will resonate with his base. is Americans who is busted. we are more polarized than at any time since ww2, and that is saying a lot. compare gap between approval o' same and opposing party voters for each President since eisenhower. maybe a 30-45 point gap. trump is representing an +70 point gap and inching towards 80. not in living memory has Americans looked at government actions and been so complete divided 'bout whether government is doing right or wrong. is Americans who has become increasingly rabid, both for and against, on every conceivable issue. if a dog is vicious and bites people, am betting gd would first look to the dog's owner to assign responsibility. even if there is something fundamental wrong with the dog, gd would hold the owner of the beast responsible to change the animal's behaviour or to place limits on the potential for doggie harm. is cheap to blame the dog and ignore sins o' the owner, yes? you o' all people is blaming the dog 'cause o' the lack o' character o' the critter's owner? if we don't reverse this trend, we deserve to get bit. HA! Good Fun!

while am not an international currency investor, we wouldn't call the zloty "joke bucks." probable illegal to send via mails regardless. and yes, am aware at this point you is joking. HA! Good Fun!

slight change to our response: am understanding how stressful is career planning, but purchase o' lottery tickets may not be a practical solution. when we first came out to CA for school, the lottery were relative new in the state. just so happened CA had built up a jackpot which dwarfed any previous US state jackpot; had many folks who were otherwise dismissive o' lotteries buying tickets. Gromnir tended to hang out with the ol guys and we were all at a pizza place when conversation turned to, what would you do if you won the lottery? *sigh* by the end o' the eve, we had all purchased at least a single ticket. we lost. never again purchased a lottery ticket. +30 years and counting. HA! Good Fun!

that should make some o' your career planning a bit less stressful. HA! Good Fun!

some may be wondering what the hell trump were talking 'bout in the chris wallace interview when the President opined how the recent daca decision provided him authority to repeal and replace daca. if you weren't wondering, that is ok, 'cause Gromnir were curious. amused/disquieted? Scoop: Trump's license to skirt the law ok, is no longer funny. is frightening. legit scary and not hyperbolic exaggeration-scary, but genuine 2020 tyranny level o' scary. "Yoo told Axios that Chief Justice John Roberts' opinion "sets out a roadmap about how a president can use his prosecutorial discretion to under-enforce the law." "The recourse would be if the next president tries to reverse what's set in motion. "Suppose President Donald Trump decided to create a nationwide right to carry guns openly," Yoo writes in his National Review op-ed. "He could declare that he would not enforce federal firearms laws, and that a new 'Trump permit' would free any holder of state and local gun-control restrictions." ""Even if Trump knew that his scheme lacked legal authority, he could get away with it for the length of his presidency. And, moreover, even if courts declared the permit illegal, his successor would have to keep enforcing the program for another year or two."" our hope, God help us, is mitch mcconnell gets wind o' this and let's trump know he won't support. recently mitch has broken with the wh on numerous covid-19 issues. if mitch and the senate republicans whose complicity has made trump excesses possible for the past three years remains silent, then only way to stop trump from implementing knowingly illegal executive orders is to have fed courts deliver injunctions until scotus reviews. ... am not sure if the snippet we provide fully conveys the scope o' the extra-legal excess trump is considering. if trump is allowed to proceed as he is apparent planning, it would be a practical end to the democratic experiment in the US. the President would no longer need Congress to pass laws on healthcare or immigration 'cause he could use executive orders he knew were illegal and his belief is the Courts, based on yoo's reading o' daca, would support the President's malfeasance for the length o' his term +2 years. is possible this is just a political stunt and trump will use to successful claim he repealed and replaced obamacare before the election, just as he claims to have built most o' the wall in spite o' fact there is less than 10 miles o' new wall. doesn't matter. turn back clock to 2017 and ask any republican US senator if they would support trump efforts to use executive orders to make Congress an incidental player on issues o' healthcare and immigration, as well as a host o' other contentious issues, and am betting you would hear universal rejection and condemnation o' the implausibility o' such a ridiculous hypothetical. three years o' sustained attacks by trump on rule of law and common sense has us teetering on the edge o' genuine tyranny. +30% o' voters is cheering trump forward as he sets the Constitution ablaze. those same +30% would happily support an amendment which prohibited the burning o' a symbol o' the republic, the flag, but they is willing to stand by and cheer as trump reduces to ashes the Constitution. Executive Order on Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence what is wrong with us?

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/02/06/signs-of-white-supremacy-extremism-up-again-in-poll-of-active-duty-troops/ “Historically, this has been a problem for the military,” she said in an interview. “We’ve been pushing the Defense Department to take this issue more seriously since 1986. There are certain parts of the white power movement that value military experience and are often recruiting there.” white supremacists active recruiting w/i the military is not a new thing. HA! Good Fun!

no, they don't. thank goodness. is no studies on the ingestion or injection o' disinfectants in spite o' fact trump said the health folks would be looking into it. is nice to know some levels o' stoopid is just ignored even by those closest to trump. regardless, this is the US and not kanada. the US President has little authority over the hazard county sheriff's department, or the milpitas city police department. if President releases training or hiring guidelines tomorrow for local police departments, almost zero would adopt and none would adopt immediate. would need be state and local and union deliberations to make such changes and absolute nobody would implement changes just 'cause President said so 'cause o' numerous legal hurdles if nothing else. the President is not a pm and we got a Constitution which specific forbids the President from doing what you suggest. and again, there were no specific call for action. were informational. @Malcador best part o' fox content is reading fox viewer comments following stories and interviews-- is a window into an alternate reality. wallace did a good job o' posing challenging questions while not complete shutting trump down by pushing too far for the President to stomach. is a couple questions we thought were noteworthy not asked, but am not gonna quibble. we will give trump credit for the courage, if not the wisdom, o' doing the interview. HA! Good Fun!

the problem is all too often the first point o' contact for veterans who need help is not the VA but law enforcement. yeah, VA should be informed, and they was, but making law enforcement aware were not wrong. is an overgeneralization, but in our experience, the people most in need o' help is the people least likely to seek or welcome such help. too often law enforcement knows before VA. however, we agree 100% the emphasis shoulda' been on help as 'posed to identification o' potential threats, but again, the informational were the result o' an Army study and the army and dhs were more concerned with threats. ... am also only vague recalling bits o' the language from the memo 'cause were a non-issue for us-- were not a Constitutional issue. if there had been special instructions, we sure as heck woulda' been reading and could likely recite it back to you verbatim. after timothy mcveigh, the military had a collective fit o' apoplexy. media painted mcveigh as a second amendment nut with interpersonal issues and a gambling problem, all which were accurate, but were hardly the full story. mcveigh were awarded a bronze star, but he also washed out o' his attempt to make it as a green beret. while mcveigh were not religious, a major motivation for the bombing were waco. mcveigh didn't belong to aryan brotherhood or similar, but he quoted white supremacist authors in his manifesto. ez labels o' mcveigh were elusive other than recognition he were young and disaffected... and a veteran. post mcveigh, aggressive tracking programs were considered and all kinda educational efforts were adopted in an attempt to address extremism in the military. the military had known for a long time they had a white supremacist issue, but it were the kinda thing they tried to ignore... and as hard as it may be to believe, the military has always been a decade or two ahead o' most o' the US when it comes to embracing reform based on race. am also having to give the military credit that even post 9/11 their focus appeared to be domestic grown far-right extremism. save for 2001 and 2015, the domestic far right extremists has been the most serious and lethal threat... though 2001 in particular is one helluva an exception. HA! Good Fun!

yeah, am recalling the smear job, but is a reason you can't find other articles other than opinion pieces and blogs. in early 2000s, the army were concerned 'bout high incidence o' vets in prison for violent crime. veterans were no more likely to be in prison, but they were far and away more likely to be in for the serious stuff. the US army started a 2004 study which were completed in 2009 and discovered veterans, particularly combat veterans, were not only more likely to commit suicide, suffer ptsd, and a whole host o' other unfortunate conditions, but they were also more likely to become radicalized. describe as special instructions to local police is highly misleading. in spite o' grossly overdramatized reporting, the result o' the bush administration study recommended, amongst other things, informing law enforcement o' risk factors and behaviours which should be considered when attempting to identify radicalization before such stuff resulted in mass shootings and whatnot. being a veteran were just one factor law enforcement were directed to be cognizant o' when considering early id o' radicalization. being discharged involuntary from military were an even more noteworthy factor. and yeah, there were perhaps at least a couple example o' overzealous cops detaining veterans 'cause they listened to wrong music or similar nonsense. *shrug* bush era program were meant to identify micah johnson and gavin long as well as dylann roof before they went over the edge. unfortunate, 'cause o' overreaction, no similar program has ever been implemented and as such many veterans with ptsd fail to get help they need. any identification program which suggests veterans could be a danger not just to themselves but others is presumptively a fail. HA! Good Fun! ps special instructions is a ridiculous way to reference. were no direction to action per se. were informational and offered recommendations, but nothing approaching instructions or directives 'cause such woulda' required an act o' Congress or the like in any event.

ok, we will bite. what were the veteran-specific special instructions the obama administration delivered to local police o' all things in the first year o' his administration? we could google, but am curious to see where gd goes with this. HA! Good Fun!

indeed. 'course the key is to position self so you are the house. HA! Good Fun!

took us a few years to appreciate stewart copeland. regardless, perhaps metaphor o' such a successful three-member band is that sometimes less police is better? apologies, were admitted just stretching to make more police relevant in politics thread. HA! Good Fun!

you don't, which is the point. while comey were still a respected director o' fbi with many years o' exemplary service and bipartisan support, he were asked 'bout gun violence statistics while testifying before Congress. comey couldn't give answers 'cause he didn't have answers. the head o' fbi did not have accurate numbers for gun violence in the US. just one example. fbi isn't what oro thinks it is, and it sure as hell doesn't manage or coordinate state and local police. folks need to learn there ain't no The Police in the USA. even americans is woeful misinformed 'bout the authority the fed has over local law enforcement practices, training, spending and activities. the intent o' US system is for police to be more direct answerable to the people who vote in sheriffs or city council/mayor elections. the further is the seat o' power from which police is directed, the greater the potential for abuse, or so believed the framers. what is to stop the Fed from sending in a national police if the issue in question is localized to portland? for better or worse, mayors and sheriffs in portland is gonna be far more sensitive to citizens o' portland than will the President or william barr. as to insurrection act, don't rely on fox. when used in past, the act has almost always been utilized by the President with approval o' a state governor, the main reason being you either need governor approval, or the activities being curtailed by the Fed need be o' a type and nature it is impracticable for states to address. is not simply a matter o' state unwillingness to use heavy-handed force which triggers. some function o' scope or type must make implausible for local to handle the matter. HA! Good Fun!

sure. we were a physics undergrad. am knowing you is unlikely to watch the whole thing, but the old connections shows were fantastic. launch angle at 8:40- ... am after the fact recognizing how our reference may be weird. is at least mildly autistic to take your launch angle comment and reference a few moments o' a tv show which likely ain't been aired, not even on pbs, since the 80s. HA! Good Fun!

'cause it takes a couple lawsuits where a student or teacher is injured and the injury coulda' been prevented by cop presence to be resulting in a loss o' more than $25 million by the school district? trick question? recall the mcdonald's coffee lawsuit everybody gets upset 'bout. am suspecting kids in your school district got hurt at some point. injury-incident made the school district aware o' a problem. by not taking measures to prevent future injury-incidents, district opens self up to heightened damage calculations. blame the lawyers if it makes you feel better. @Guard Dog and no, obama were not talking 'bout a national police force. we asked you to show support for such years ago and when you did it weren't actual support. is not new ground being tread. HA! Good Fun! ps given how much we blasted obama in the past on his non-response to the rioting and anti-police sentiment which exploded late in his administration, am conceding his touchy-feely national community outreach to diminish the need for police kinda looks prescient in 2020.

stopped watching baseball in 1995 after the strike year. were only painful in 2005(?) as we didn't get to appreciate a white sox world series. ... is passing strange that covid-19 will have us following mlb for firstest time in ~25 years. has been a long time since we were genuine curious 'bout baseball, which am recognizing is the result o' a flaw in Gromnir character. nevertheless, will be... interesting. for all we know, 2020 baseball looks like blernsball. HA! Good Fun!

they aren't arresting people on federal property. if situation were a fed courthouse, and some jerk attacked a judge or a witness, then the onsite fps could arrest. arrest folks off fed property on mere suspicion they may have been involved in property damage o' a fed building? again, the US is not like european countries. this kinda thing is specific prohibited. try and use fps to crackdown on protesters is so beyond the pale it beggars the imagination. get a warrant. work with state authorities whose job it is to deal with vandalism and property crimes. etc. is not as if fed is powerless to do anything 'bout those who vandalize fed property which exist in States. however, to use o' dhs/fps this way is what we feared in 2001-2002, but hoped would never happen. the only saving grace is fps and dhs is having an extreme small number o' personnel, relative speaking. with current numbers, this insanity may only be taken so far. trivia: our recollection is fuzzy as to numbers, but ~1790, the fed government initiated the fps. almost as old as the fed government. purpose o' the legislation were to make possible to hire less than a dozen night watchman to protect a handful o' fed buildings.

a few years ago gd claimed obama were in support o' a national police force. obama never did or said anything which would validate such a belief other than gd's views of democrats and a few obama comments which had nothing whatsoever to do with establishing a national police. this kinda mistake is not new on these boards. however, we bring up not to embarrass gd, but to point out how trump's current actions in portland should have @Guard Dog frothing with rage, and lack o' similar condemnation from everybody in Congress, regardless o' party, is troubling... or is troubling if accusations is true. am waiting for some kinda evidence other than a few staged or questionable videos, but portland mayor statements alone is damning. if the United States has sent law enforcement to portland w/o state/local approval, then such would be a serious breach o' the public trust as well as an abominable violation o' the Constitution. for some senators, there is no bridge too far. fact the public as a whole isn't more outraged shows just how far we has fallen in such a short time. update: DHS Official On Reports Of Federal Officers Detaining Protesters In Portland, Ore. "But, you know, this is a posture we intend to continue not just in Portland but in any of the facilities that we're responsible for around the country." so, not just portland. all those nightmare scenarios Gromnir mentioned post 9/11 is finally coming to life. the federal protection service don't have the authority the dhs deputy secretary claims, but it don't matter if nobody will stop the President.

and right on schedule. thanks for proving a point. (edit:) btw, there is no The Police in the US. is more o' a mistake to generalize police than even democrats which itself is gonna have you making mistaken assumptions as often as not. there is no US police. full-stop. period. each state has hundreds o' different police entities, all acting with degrees o' autonomy. county sheriffs departments may have vast different training and monetary support than a municipal police department which may very well have overlapping jurisdiction. city and county and state police organizations will have unique relationships with localities. and btw, the federal government is specific prohibited from interfering with state police power by the Constitution. HA! Good Fun! ps weren't more than a few month ago when folk such as klobuchar and harris were running for democrat ticket, we were being reminded o' the prosecutorial experience o' a few democrat Presidential candidates. unlike trump who claims to be a law and order politician, harris, in particular, were the real deal. she worked daily with and against cops to get tough on crime. don't generalize.

you people are nuts. only explicit comments from biden is that he doesn't support defund, but you rabid squirrels thinks you found a nut hiding underneath his words? serious, this is why the volish stuff bothers us. only explanation we see is you and skarpy is attributing a position to biden 'cause you believe such is a democrat/liberal position and lack o' evidence, or even evidence which complete refutes is ignored in favor o' the conclusion you wanna believe. HA! Good Fun! ps am anticipating a trumpish double-down from you and/or skarpy.