Gromnir

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.

AFTER doing the interview, trump tweets: "Corrupt Joe Biden wants to defund our police. He may use different words, but when you look at his pact with Crazy Bernie, and other things, that’s what he wants to do. It would destroy America!" the bridge troll cannot help himself. a double-down is inevitable. HA! Good Fun!

our first post in the initial covid-19 thread on this board observed how one o' the hurdles to an effective national virus response in this nation were the small group o' americans who look at government action as a threat to liberty. "next, they will be coming after our guns." sure enough, mask mandates became inextricable linked with second amendment rights advocates. no doubt many people 'cross the globe were perplexed by the conflating o' gun rights and US social distancing and mask wearing efforts, nevertheless, such were complete expected. there is americans who don't trust the government even when government is just promoting good science, 'cause too many o' such folks don't trust the scientists neither. these self described patriots don't trust media, and yet they counter-intuitive and beyond all reason glomp onto extreme information sources-- blogs and fringe "news" sites. one would assume a person suspicious o' media would look to multiple media sources in an attempt to find corroboration o' contested facts; if both ny times and oan are reporting facts same, then regardless o' spin, one should have more confidence in reported facts, no? instead, and contrary to all reason, these clowns fixate on the most fringe news offerings; sources which do naught but confirm their biases. is unfortunate, but these individuals with high bs receptivity are not only growing in number, but they have the internet with its dizzying options for misinformation as well as a President who active promotes conspiracy theories. there were always a small group o' Americans who were gonna reject masks, same way they will reject vaccine. two problems: 1) a small group is enough to undercut efforts when pandemic is the issue; and 2) paradoxical, because masks were politicized by highly visible leadership, the number o' folks suspicious o' masks went from fringe to a bit more mainstream. ... am not gonna try and explain why folks suspicious o' government would trust the inveterate liar and ignorant b00b who is trump. HA! Good Fun!

from merriam-webster... good enough mistake noun Definition of mistake (Entry 2 of 2) 1: a wrong judgment : MISUNDERSTANDING 2: a wrong action or statement proceeding from faulty judgment, inadequate knowledge, or inattention your posted response proves our point. all you got going for you on this issue is pugnacity. you ascribe a viewpoint to blm and antifa based on actions or words o' individuals you frequent have no idea regarding their actual connection to either group. furthermore, conflating antifa with blm is just ridiculous, but you persist in this as well. you are pugnacious. until you overcome your initial and fundamental mistakes, progress is doomed. Fighting alone. I’m a GOP governor. Why didn’t Trump help my state with coronavirus testing? HA! Good Fun!

the core irrationality is impossible to overcome. vol hears that some rock-for-brains yahoo on the arse end o' the internet made a claim that all white people are racist and he reads as all white people are kkk/nazis. am not denying we has seen such hasty generalizations being made and they offend us. vol clear is also offended by the manifest wrongness o' the hasty generalization fail-- is unfair to label all white folks as nazis 'cause o' the behaviours o' dirtbags. do nothing save nod head sadly and silent condemn racist behaviour may be a morally insufficient response to injustice, but we will leave that fight for another day. regardless, vol is justifiable displeased with the generalization. vol's response to the injustice o' painting an entire group/class/organization with a single oversized brush that colors all members with the sins o' the few or the wrongs o' the one is to do the exact same thing which annoyed him. he now insists every wrong done unto cops, frequent with no information at his disposal save that cops were injured or harmed or killed, is to blame blm and antifa. say what? vol is incapable or unwilling to see his blanket condemnations as mirroring the injustices which originally offended him. dialogue is doomed 'cause the fundamental mistake vol makes, having been pointed out to him dozens o' times by many people, is incomprehensible for vol. for decades we have personal seen vol rabid defend the indefensible with complete conviction. were funny when were game stuff. were amusing when were bioware or obsidian or troika trying to talk vol off the ledge before they reached enlightenment and just accepted vol same way one comes to terms with the inevitable unpleasantness o' monsoons, taxes, and michael bay films. the shtick is vol being vol. am not attacking vol character, 'cause vol, in his defense, is not the one who has changed. 2020 vol is same as 2001 vol and if he were funny then and not now is 'cause our perception o' the shtick has changed. not vol's fault. regardless, am recognizing the impossibility o' making headway 'gainst monsoon vol. he has made a fundamental mistake which is obvious to just about everybody, and the mistake is not that he disapproves o' blm or antifa. as we has noted already, Gromnir has a kinda passionate dislike o' antifa, particular as members is typical younger and educated, and those is the folks we is hopeful will manage to fix problems as they has done in past generations. can't fully express our disappointment with antifa. is not vol's position on blm and antifa which is the problem, and he don't get that either. oh well. the true mind boggling reality for Gromnir is not vol intransigence but fact vol is no longer an outlier. the shtick is not funny in part 'cause is race and not games features, but is all the more disturbing 'cause when we hear vol rail 'gainst blm and antifa, we hear his unreasonableness echoing far beyond this message board. HA! Good Fun!

for those perhaps confused by the st. vincent de paul reference, st. vincent de paul is a catholic lay charity. were started by a group o' french law students in the early 1800s-- provided food and firewood to the poor o' paris during a particular brutal winter. is not uncommon for stvdp to have thrift store locations in cities as part o' their mission. 'course there is also more than a few catholic churches dedicated to st. vincent de paul, so is possible mr. joel is suggesting donation to the church as 'posed to the charity. regardless, paunchy, motorcycle helmet billy joel playing a piano meant for the trash is kinda fun, even if person with the camera appears to be suffering from a seizure. HA! Good Fun!

*shrug* we didn't respond to that video. our snowflakes comments were generalized and had zero mention o' gender. nothing we said even implied a defense o' gender bias. in fact, what inspired our response @Skarpen were his reaction to the "dudes" video you linked. observe how we liked your posting o' such. is another text reading fail by skarpy? long history o' such. however, we cannot say for certain he is speaking 'bout the starbucks video 'cause in yet another composition fail, skarp fails to identify the source o' his accusation. is another example o' what he meant was something other than what he wrote? who could guess? HA! Good Fun!

can't speak to legitimacy o' article. the toronto sun is a conservative tabloid and we can't find any yusra khogali articles at more reputable toronto news sources which corroborate. is numerous conservative blogs n' such reposting what you linked, but that's it. nevertheless, let's assume for a moment everything in the article is true.... which is a Big Stretch, no? even if true, founder is not same as leader. blm don't have a leader, though perhaps blm toronto does... have no idea. am knowing we wouldn't' trust the sun if we wanted to know such details. am understanding why at least US blm don't have any kinda leadership. protesters in hong kong is kinda a 2020 model for protesters dealing with government suppression efforts. heck, look to US history including nixon going after black panthers (and others) and more recent obama targeting tea party, has a disorganized resistance scheme being the model du jour. 21st century tech makes organization less necessary 'cause it takes little to have like minded folks gather via the internet and kinda/sorta agree to take some kinda action... which spontaneous morphs into a flash mob or something similar. the protesters don't need military precision as they ain't attacking fortified positions. downside is lack o' blm leadership means there isn't a recognized voice to disavow behaviour and actors which is not representing the blm message. even the notion o' core values for blm is a bit fluid as such requires consensus which comes with organization blm is active resisting. again, am sympathetic to blm choice to forgo leadership. doj sending out fbi to kick in doors and possible arrest blm leadership is not inconceivable, but is not possible given the absence o' meaningful leadership. even so, w/o an identifiable blm voice, there is nobody to say yusra khogali isn't speaking for blm... not that we genuine know what yusra khogali is saying. regardless, one would hope in the future gd would try and find more reputable sources to be linking. HA! Good Fun!

explain... or don't. either way works for us. am not gonna guess at your implication 'cause it is no doubt the result o' yet another read/write fail on your part. HA! Good Fun!

well now, is not everyday you see such an incomprehensible non-sequitur. congrats? given your recent posts revealing complete fails o' reading and composition fail, am not shocked, but am admitted puzzled. HA! Good Fun!

yes, it is a terrible curse that we read text as written as 'posed to divining what you believe were meant, or what you intended but did not write. is a burden to be able to read. that said, is another teachable moment skarpy will never benefit from, 'cause you gotta know how am gonna resurrect this when he inevitable laments how some group he approves o' is mistreated by angry "snowflakes." HA! Good Fun!

am very much against any individual who resorts to violence to make a point much less murder. 'course you blame antifa and blm for every cop who is murdered 'cause o' your perverted transitive property fails. most o' your other claims, (eg. atifa rapists) is lunatic fringe stuff and hardly merits response 'cause again, you latch on to singular examples from the most tangential related individuals and actions to condemn literal thousands. such behaviour is obvious unreasonable and wrong and doesn't need reply save for our repeated mention o' sadness o' how quirky kanadian gamer vol were amusing and the 2020 incarnation is something else. what a shame. and your selective quoting is not helping you make a case... you left out, "for the endorsement of any product, service or enterprise, or for the private gain of friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity." either intentional or a grammar fail, but is not that the product endorsement need be for personal gain to be inappropriate and illegal. 'course campaign activities on federal land/property is also illegal, which is why yesterday's rose garden speech were so bizarre. we do miss loony and harmless vol. HA! Good Fun! ps we has expressed many times how much the goals o' antifa offends us. when first amendment rights, put into practice, offend a listener, the response should be the one described in our signature as expressed by J. Brandeis. just as is a failure o' character to respond to nazis in skokie with silence, it would be inappropriate to stop their parade with force. am thinking we ain't been subtle 'bout our displeasure with antifa espoused goals, but such is a long way off from blaming antifa for rando murders.