Gromnir

so what? you are arguing simple to make a bad point. you suggested "burn" or "hide away" books. the government never owned Gromnir's books or the ideas they contain. if the government tried to come to Gromnir's home and take our bust o' nietzsche and burn it or hide it away, we would be mad as hell. converse, if tomorrow the city o' new orleans placed a mammoth sized version o' our nietzsche bust in a municipal park, who would be offended if a week later they decided to move it to a museum instead? one or two diehard thus spoke zarathustra fans? even if there were huge uproar or resistance, then how else other than ordinary democratic process should one resolve the kerfuffle? seriously folks. HA! Good Fun!

That is a case of strategy not really catching up with technology. 90% of the Officers of both sides (this would drop a LOT by war's end) were graduates of West Point, VMI, and places like that. They were taught Napoleonic tactics because that is what suited the weapons of the day. Many of them were also veterans of Mexico and there the infantry used the .69 caliber model 1816 musket. Smooth bore muskets were fast to reload but useless beyond 75 yards and very inaccurate. The only way to use them effectively was to fire in unison from a massed formation. By 1861 some of the state militias were still using them and many southern militias were using the British Brown Bess, but most of the regular army were carrying the 1861 Springfield. It was a muzzle loaded percussion rifle. They had a max range of 500 yards but were deadly inside of 300. Marching in formation against that was suicidal. Just ask Col Oliver Howard who got the 3rd & 4th Maine regiment killed almost to the last man assaulting the bald hills at Bull Run. By the time the Manassas Campaing was finished both sides had changed tactics to firing and advancing by regiment rather than the stand and fire of the musket days. And by the Battle of Yellow Tavern near the war's end even that was gone and regimental sized engagements became company sized since it was easier to cover the movements of small bodies of troops, is no question tactics failed to match new technologies. took far too long for lee to recognize. there were officers, north and south, who did see that the fundamental changes in warfare required changes in strategy and tactics. lee were honorable and brilliant, but he didn't comprehend how warfare had evolved 'til it were too late. shoulda' listened to longstreet and others. given the disadvantages the south had in terms o' manpower, manufacturing, and the absence o' an empowered centralized government, lee were fighting the war the wrong way. is perhaps a sad/welcome (depending on your geographic location) irony to be recognizing how lee's brilliance prevented any chance o' a military leader other than lee being placed in charge o' southern forces. lee's many victories were pyrrhic. the victories lee achieved, victories which saw the sacrifice o' many thousands o' irreplaceable men and tons o' slow replaced material, doomed the south. if lee had lost more frequent, perhaps the south would tried to fight a different war. will never know. the gifted book example is hardly analogous. would only apply to government approved books, no? have a city take a book off required reading list 'cause it glorifies misogyny or slavery might be actual parallel. where does one have books forced 'pon them by tthe government save in school? even so, am agreeing how removal o' books such as huckleberry finn and the sun also rises, books frequent accused o' racism and misogyny, is disappointing. am saddened when such books is removed from high school lists 'cause o' misguided notions o' cultural or gender sensitivity. has always been a problem with democracy, eh? get enough stoopid people to agree to something and it becomes law just so long as it don't violate the constitution. keep in mind the present issue is only referencing public statuary and monuments. the state/local/fed government puts up a statue and am not seeing any good reason for preventing removal by the same process. private owned is a far different scenario. if gifted wants to keep his nathan bedford forrest or lawn jockey statue in his backyard, we would be questioning his taste and judgement, but would be little the government could/should do 'bout it. keep your offensive books. keep your curious statue o' ______. public display o' such stuff is a complete different issue, no? HA! Good Fun! ps the notion o' endurance granting historical significance worthy o' insulation is asinine. one argument for maintaining southern slavery (pre civil war) and racism (post civil war) were the idiocy o' a need to maintain southern culture and heritage. do something bad for a long enough time don't grant historical significance. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/80345-charleston-church-massacre/?p=1710589

slippery slope nonsense aside, am not a fan o' jefferson. once he became president, his hypocrisy were exposed. try to destroy the Court. made unconstitutional louisiana purchase. jefferson out-federaled the federalists by miles. get enough people to vote for representatives who wanna remove jefferson image or pass legislation to do same? not got a problem. why should democratic process be circumvented to protect certain golden calves? ... our pov is a bit different though. wouldn't shed a single tear if a decaying military satellite fell out of orbit and struck mount rushmore. HA! Good Fun!

gifted has ruined us. can't see a quirky drone story w/o thinking we should link in this place, 'cause o' gifted. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/one-day-marines-could-be-building-drones-battlefield-180963383/ as to civil war monuments, am admitted conflicted. is understandable for folks to reject the glorification o' certain personages. monuments to nathan bedford forrest is gonna deserve questioning. idolize those who prosecuted a war in part to maintain slavery is o' dubious merit. at same time, act as if it would be better to erase or forget james longstreet is equal repugnant to us. oh, and robert e. lee, while a brilliant general, were ultimate the wrong general for the south. the north never genuine committed its full resources to the war, which is kinda bizarre when you think 'bout it. everyday life in nyc remained largely unchanged during the war, and those northern ivy league schools were still having rowing competitions on sunday afternoons. is our opinion lee were the wrong kinda general for the war the south shoulda' been fighting. massed men walking 'cross fields into waves o' oncoming rifle fire were wrong tactics. attempt to attack north in 1863 were clear wrong approach. lee were a brilliant military commander fighting the wrong way in a bad war. regardless, we don't mind removal o' all the old civil war monuments much. am worried 'bout attempts to forget rather than confront. alternative suggestion: paint all such monuments lurid red. all those nice bronze statues o' lee and davis and jackson could stay, but only if painted a symbolic bright red. do same for ole miss mascot. stone mountain. etc. paint the marble and bronze red makes less likely to forget than removal, yes? 'course am doubtful most sons o' the south would approve o' our solution. HA! Good Fun!

So the main character is half human half vulcan, who has a bad dad. Everything else in the trailer was a mess. I have absolutely no idea what is going on. Perhaps that's the reason why they removed the trailer? Main character is a human who was raised on Vulcan. Discovery is an exploration vessel and it looks like they're going to come into conflict with the Klingons as they try to map space. Trailer seemed pretty clear to me. Those were the Klingons? No wonder I couldn't figure it out. I thought they were some new alien race. uruk-hai HA! Good Fun!

Red, trust me there are several important lessons I have learnt about how to have a healthy, positive and sustainable lifestyle If you a politician you cannot make the media your enemy for no reasonable reason. He was criticizing the media back in the days when he needed to win the Republican presidential candidacy, it was unprecedented and as I said he has absolutely made enemies of numerous media institutions He was under the mistaken impression that a man can be greater than the global media, its not likely. Anyone in the public limelight can have a good and respectful relationship with the media, the onus is on them as the media is generally not hard to understand or rationalize Trump attacking the media was one of the few things I could get behind with him. Let me ask you some questions, is the USA media honest and unbiased? Are you okay with media NOT being nuetral? Are you okay with the media being nothing more than political propaganda machines, where truth is sacrificed or twisted by both sides? this is the thing the new alt-right and the hard lefts and professional political victims has managed to sell: the media is 'posed to be "unbiased" and "neutral." how does such a goal even make sense to people when we is 'posed to have Free press? americans is free to voice opinions and rage 'gainst folks in washington and sacramento. you want press to be free, but only to speak objective truth? until recent, most americans woulda' wholehearted agreed that press should be free o' government entanglement. free press is no less a fundamental freedom than free exercise o' religion and speech. what changed? press is free, but only so long as they is unbiased? who decides neutral? who decides unbiased? the government? when did we lose our way? our press has always been biased. our press has always advocated. is nothing new. lincoln were so enraged with the interference o' a free press, he actual did what trump asked comey to do: he arrested journalists. lincoln sent his thugs on nighttime raids and imprisoned large numbers o' antagonist journalists. recall those scenes from v for vendetta? doesn't get too much coverage in our history books. regardless, lincoln were incensed with journalists not 'cause they were unbiased and neutral and spreading difficult truth but rather 'cause they were frequent part o' an active campaign to smear his efforts. one can sympathize with lincoln, but his actions insofar as the press and habeas corpus (and a long list o' other stuff) were unconstitutional. you were never promised neutral or unbiased press. we don't want neutral or unbiased 'cause only way to ensure is with government intervention, no? got opposite o' free press if neutrality is enforced. recent. am not certain when things changed, but were recent. sure, we has always had folks angry 'bout journalistic biases, but the rage were directed at individual journalists. don't like the chicago tribune? read sun times instead. with all the different news outlets available, all reporting the same events, the facts tend to be reported accurate... or at least that were the reasonable understanding until the now times. washington post or cnn would look ridiculous if they reported how kravspekistan had invaded montenaranga when in fact it were the other way around and every other news outlet reported correct. ... reasonable has gone out the window. the belief in a ubiquitous conspiracy o' journalists has folks actual placing greater trust in the fringe and outlier news sources. reasoning goes thus: if all the mainstream media is in on the fix, then the only folks worthy o' belief is the journalists who is telling a different story. is all backwards and upside-down. instead o' looking for the consensus facts from reputable sources, many folks is actual seeing greater legitimacy from the fringe. regardless, a free press necessarily precludes an unbiased or neutral press. axiomatic. you is gonna get largely accurate press 'cause o' the natural forces at work with a functioning "marketplace of ideas," but just as bob and trudy can look at living conditions in gaza and cheap labor in southeast asia with wholly different pov, so will news outlets. is costs o' freedom. is a cost we is more than willing to pay, even if is, at times, frustrating. free religion means we get wacky cults. free speech means we get folks burning koran/bible/torah. free press means we get breitbart. gotta accept the costs o' freedoms. HA! Good Fun!

if the new administration gets its way, who can say? hyperbole 'course. the US ain't trying to stop waves o' suicide bombers from mexico. is no analogue to fear o' hamas cells carrying out attacks on israeli motorists or communities under cover o' darkness, and slipping back 'cross the border before dawn. the israelis got different needs and their wall serves a different purpose... a wall which is mostly fencing and protects less than 300 miles o' border after 10 years has elapsed since start o' construction. HA! Good Fun!

in the spirit o' full disclosure http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66652-pathfinder-crpg-by-obsidian/?p=1477353 we were always reserved 'bout the long term prospects o' the paizo-obsidian deal. also, just as we criticized troika for making toee, am concerned 'bout kingmaker in spite o' the fact we like the series. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66652-pathfinder-crpg-by-obsidian/?p=1476523 even so, while our personal anticipation for toee were slight, we saw the potential business upside for atari. toee were 'posed to be the first release o' a series o' streamlined d&d crpgs based 'pon classic tsr modules. were 'posed to be quick developments. troika... altered the plan. am wondering if the old atari plan is being reinvigorated with a different developer. HA! Good Fun!

Former prime minister Ariel Sharon began constructing the barrier in June 2002, at the height of the Second Intifada, to prevent the infiltration of suicide bombers into Israel. So far, just over 62% of the planned 708-kilometer (440-mile) barrier has been completed, at an estimated cost of nearly NIS 11 billion ($3 billion) as of late 2013, according to Finance Ministry data published by Israeli NGO B’Tselem. The entire barrier has been extended very little since 2007. completed less than 300 miles in more than 10 years, though there has been recent attempts to finish the wall, a wall which is mostly fencing. the us boarder with mexico is longer and geographic different with large obstructions such as rivers complicating construction. the whole reality o' the gulf o' mexico and pacific ocean bordering vast stretches o' mexico, areas where us coast guard can't patrol, also complicates things, no? oh, btw, gaza were complete enclosed by wall before the most recent troubles. remember the gaza kerfuffle, yes? recall how the isd operation in gaza were initiated in part to collapse the extensive tunnels which were making a mockery o' wall? if the goal were to reduce suicide bombers coming 'cross the border from mexico... *shrug* as for the appointment o' mueller, one hopes senior wh aides will stress to trump how bad it would look for him to demand the special counsel's loyalty. HA! Good Fun!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/congress-shows-growing-concern-over-trump-controversies/ar-BBBemnV?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartanntp as an increasing number of republican Congressman question the wh handling of recent events, the big news of the day (so far) is the announcement comey has been invited to testify before the house oversight committee next wednesday. public testimony. http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/333870-chaffetz-to-invite-comey-to-testify HA! Good Fun!

kingmaker is an existing pathfinder adventure series. http://paizo.com/pathfinder/adventurePath/kingmaker for those curious too many questions to be anticipating. there were a couple better-than-good adventures in the pnp series. however, am (not genuinely) surprised. given the paizo-obsidian partnership announcement some time ago, the news o' a crpg pathfinder game not being developed by obsidian is... curious. HA! Good Fun!

were more folks in the room. were considerable more folks who would have at least second hand knowledge o' what were said. http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/16/politics/trump-russian-officials-meeting-what-we-know/ *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

lack o' clear and convincing evidence at this time is why there should be an investigation. not need an investigation if everything were simple and obvious. famous athlete is at scene of a murder. only witnesses is the athlete, the deceased, and members o' the athlete's entourage. chicago tribune prints a story which indicates at least one witness, who remains unidentified for personal safety concerns, has fingered the athlete as the killer. the deceased ain't talking. the athlete provides a narrative o' his innocence, a narrative which ain't actual consistent with the other witnesses. nevertheless, everybody at the scene public claims the athlete is innocent. case closed? given admitted limited facts, would gifted start with belief in the athlete's story, or would he be suspicious? yeah, the folks in the room during trump's meeting with the russians is not gonna be subject to a real investigation. ain't gonna be interrogations o' the president and kislyak. is unlikely we ever get a statement o' facts which is beyond question. even so, we want investigators to be suspicious. am thinking gifted, faced with similar circumstances not related to trump would be suspicious. who wouldn't be suspicious? HA! Good Fun! ps at the coast guard grad commencement today, trump observed "No politician in history has been treated worse or more unfairly" than himself. ... funny stuff.

actually, it sounds like the correct starting point for an investigation. no doubt one o' the reasons the trump campaign switched from ronald reagan to andrew jackson as the role model for trump is 'cause trump voters is suspicious o' russia. cold war soviet distrust is not forgotten particular 'mongst the alt-right crowd. possible first thing one thinks o' when invoking reagan is the cold war conflict. trump's russian entanglements is arguable where he is most vulnerable with his core voters. regardless, go into an investigation believing everybody is gonna lie to you sounds like the reasonable pov. doubting thomas got a bad rap. such skepticism might be antithetical to questions o' faith, but am knowing we don't want the folks investigating to make judgments based on such elusive and ephemeral stuff as faith. HA! Good Fun!

"Alone in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump began the discussion by condemning leaks to the news media, saying that Mr. Comey should consider putting reporters in prison for publishing classified information, according to one of Mr. Comey’s associates." HA! Good Fun!

So what's the difference to all other publications, according to you? Three words: Duke Rape Story. There are about half a dozen others but that was the worst by far. All in the same vein though. If a story sounds good and fits their narrative it does not need to be true to be in Rolling Stone. there were also criticism o' the mcchrystal story. seniority o' sources were exaggerated. accuracy o' quotes were questioned. etc. even so, as much as there were criticism o' the mccain article, and a number o' folks close to the story tell a substantial different account, am not gonna reject rolling stone out of hand simple 'cause they clear have an agenda they is trying to advance. whether it is the story involving over privileged white kids at duke, or a decorated US serviceman, am knowing rolling stone is gonna spin as much as possible. such a recognition don't make everything they report wrong. am indeed cautious, but rolling stone nevertheless provides in depth reporting not always available from traditional sources. oh, and we think some o' the rolling stone best singer/guitarist/song lists are crap, but such belongs in a different thread. HA! Good Fun!

So what's the difference to all other publications, according to you? rolling stone has broken a number of important stories. we do not disparage a rolling stone article simple 'cause it is rolling stone. the article does offer a different narrative, and is worth reading. HA! Good Fun!

That type of story doesn't really expire though. I mean I don't think he is just coasting on it or anything, but that gives him some lifelong street cred in my world. keep in mind it were trump who brought up the pow status o' mccain in 2015. mccain weren't even running 'gainst trump. for no conceivable reason we can see, trump spontaneously questions the one unassailable aspect o' mccain's history: his war record. *shrug* even when there is no reasonable defense o' trump behavior, many o' his loyalist defend him. the present situation is just another case o' trump mind numbing incompetence. sure, the President can declassify. the original washington post article stated it were unlikely trump did anything illegal by leaking classified precise 'cause he can declassify. could declassify seawolf sub capabilities too. identify what trump can do is red herring. can do is far different than should do. so we got a President who has had his campaign under investigation for collusion with russians, and contemporaneous with firing the fbi director handling the investigation o' such collusion, he invites russian diplomats into a closed-door meeting where he proceeds to divulge code-word classified info to the russian diplomats... and russian journalists. yesterday the wh story were that no classified info were divulged, but trump blew up that narrative. ... the trump defenders baffle us. p*$$y grabs and attacks o' mccain's actions in vietnam and the literal dozen o' post january 20 ice cream headache moments we has needed suffer as we read new stories 'bout trump rage tweets and hasty executive orders baffle us. am getting how folks don't like beltway politicians, but this can't be what you wanted as an alternative. HA! Good Fun!

Because no way in hell there could be information that can and should be share between two countries fighting a common war in the same area, but at the same time sharing it with general population would cause harm. No way, never ever. HA! Good Fun! you pretty much have identified what is a reason for keeping intelligence classified. duh. a day ago the criticism o' trump were that he shared classified info with the russians. wh categorical denied such sharing. today we get a new narrative. now the President shared classified intelligence with russian diplomats, and a russian journalist, but were all for a good cause? *chuckle* the folks defending is almost as comical as is the wh narrative. HA! Good Fun!

well I thought Trump folks were anti establishment, they were not necessary republicans? our shock came when trump claimed mccain were no war hero 'cause he were captured. sure, mccain were already a decorated pilot before being shot down, but after capture and subjected to torture, he refused his own release until other american servicemen in the camp were given freedom. trump's followers tend to be fringe, but most see themselves as patriotic. http://www.newsweek.com/sorry-trump-story-john-mccain-war-hero-355617 from typical trump supporters, we woulda' expected more backlash 'gainst trump for attacking mccain's war record. still baffles us how little impact the mccain smear and the p*$$* grab comments had 'pon trump diehards.

still doesn't say what he shared which makes it look worse, not better, for trump. nobody is sharing the details, which at least suggests the information were o' a sensitive nature. is no reason to keep such info hidden unless doing so could compromise intelligence assets. the longer we do not hear details o' what he shared, the worse it looks for trump. also, trump now making it clear that he can, at his discretion, release classified information makes the situation look bad for trump. initial wh narrative were how no info were released. now trump is making clear to the American people he has authority to release classified at his discretion. is all making worse, not better. the mccain statement is also a prepared release and not some kinda one-off blunder or tweet mistake. is not mccain scrambling to come up with an excuse for a mistake. talk without thinking and tweet rants is the kinda thing trump is famous for, and possibly the cause o' him blundering with his ejaculation o' sensitive intelligence info to the russians as he bragged 'bout how well he were informed. gd mentions how intelligence is shared all the time, and he is likely correct. am suspecting surreptitious sharings, some o' which may be real and some intentional false, will be shared with non allies to advance USA goals. such sharings, done by a President whose campaign is being investigated for collusion with the russians is bad optics. such sharings contemporaneous with the President having fired the previous fbi director in part 'cause o' the aforementioned investigation is looking very bad. pass along code-word intelligence to the russians with a russian journalist in the room would seem ill-advised. etc. longer we don't know details, the worse it looks for trump. no details makes much more likely that the info released were sensitive. HA! Good Fun!

Wrong thread mate. Should be in alternative facts. http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/05/15/mcmaster-wapo-classified-info-story-is-false-i-was-in-the-room-it-didnt-happen/ Per NBC News' Brad Jaffy, pay attention to what McMaster actually tried to refute. "At no time were sources or methods discussed." The reporting never mentioned Trump revealing the sources or methods. That's a classic Red Herring. Additionally, the Washington Post reporters vetted the reporting directly with Administration and/or Intelligence officials who specifically requested that the newspaper not publish certain specific details on account of national security. They wouldn't do that unless the reporting was correct. The Editorial board wouldn't give the green light to publish this story unless multiple reliable sources confirmed the reporting. this is a potential fubar moment for the President. if the city name where an operation is taking place and other details is too sensitive to be disclosed by the washington post, then the President shouldna' have disclosed to the russians. if such details is not particular sensitive, then is no reason for the wh or the washington post to keep such details unspoken. within a couple o' days, is gonna become quite apparent if there were a breach by the President. silence by wh regarding details will be damning. washington post is sitting on a potential powder keg as eventual somebody is gonna wanna subpoena them, particular if the wh does remain silent. the terse wh response thus far is not a condemnation by any means. is quite possible this story could be nothing save for yet another example o' the predictable bad judgment o' the President. having such a close-door meeting with russian diplomats and russian state journalism present, given the current p00p storm regarding the comey firing and the ongoing russian-trump campaign collusion investigation, were curious even before the washington post story. could be nothing. or... HA! Good Fun!

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/mummified-armored-dinosaur-makes-its-debut-1-180963311/ HA! Good Fun!

http://time.com/4779985/trey-gowdy-fbi-director-replacement-james-comey-donald-trump/ first candidate to withdraw. doubt is the last. find successor for vacated fbi director spot could very easy look like an attempt to fill the cleveland browns head coach job. don't be surprised when the sheriff from etowah county alabama preemptive takes self out of the running. HA! Good Fun!

Technically, wouldn't this be Trump team collusion with the Russian government? But hey, he's POTUS and as such can declassify and reveal whatever Intel he wants. well, there was a single journalist in the room at the time o' the meeting, so perhaps we could ask him what actual happened. ... 'course he is a russian photographer working for russian state-run media. no american journalist were allowed in the room. who coulda' possible seen this kinda thing happening? with numerous wh leaks and accusations o' collusion 'tween the trump campaign and the russians, is utter shocking such a meeting, at this time, might result in bad press for the wh. HA! Good Fun!