Gromnir

if this ain't legit, am gonna be extreme disappointed. mr. Page is a soft-spoken man of keen intellect and unquestioned integrity; my respect for him as a jurist and as a human being is profound and sincere. a recipient of the Presidential medal of freedom, the nflpa honors its members with an award named after the former judge and notre dame all-american. oh, and the dude is 80ish. edit: our original source. HA! Good Fun! ps am thinking somebody at the nflpa has a sense o' humor, 'cause previous to 2018, their community mvp award were named for byron "whizzer" white.

"you're wrong about that." we never denied that the quotes were genuine. why would we? as we noted, you will find qualitative same quotes from al jazeera. our complaint were that the quotes were lacking meaningful context, were unattributed, unlinked and that you misrepresented the conclusions and findings o' the article, a position which unlike zor, we supported with quotes and links + attributions. we posted more than a half dozen western news stories, proper linked and attributed, which most certain did not "embiggen" pahlavi but instead revealed equivocation and ambivalence regarding pahlavi relevance. also, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, the lede does not necessarily include "summary opinions." "or if you prefer" is not somehow transforming your lead into gold and you are again purposeful misrepresenting. lede is a hook + essential facts. converse, distinct from facts, opinions is part of the analysis o' the writers which you purposeful avoided... is no doubt why you failed to link and attribute so that others wouldn't realize your obfuscations. if a writer summarizes their own article, it is most likely gonna happen in the conclusion. and funny you should mention machado, 'cause we did an anonymous search for venezuela last friday as we wanted to see just how relevant the idiotic nobel prize story were. all too often the algorithm feeds us what it thinks we want to see. of course if we had searched for machado + venezuela, every story returned would be 'bout machado. duh even so, more than half the stories returned were 'bout the ridiculous nobel prize nonsense in spite of everything else going on in venezuela. one such headline, from a source you did not link or attribute but which was the origin o' one o' your supplied quotes, mentioned the "swag bag" she carried with her after leaving the white house. is the world we live in that trump signature gift bags is news. today? not so much. machado is hardly front page at many/most western news sites available to a US reader. the thing is, pahlavi never got anywhere near the attention as did machado. even when he held a news conference, and on the day when iran tv were hacked in his name, the first +60 western stories on iran+ protests failed to mention pahlavi in the headlines or ledes more than once. "you are wrong." grammerly, your source pointed out why your failure to attribute and link were wrong and self defeating. your conclusory statement that, "And on Pahlavi, taking the first ten search engine results for reza pahlavi (exc wikipedia/ brittanica and revapahlavi.org) over the past four days," (you realize that ain't meaningful context, yes?) were the kinda supplied "methodology" (lordy) which magical obviates the need summaries as well as real links and attributions is a laughable response with zero support save zor's says-so. well, at least you are learning about strawman, how to meaningful summarize news articles, the error o' relying on mindless search engine populations, the existence o' a variety of flavor o' ledes, the fact that the first paragraph of an article is not always a summary, etc. unfortunately, am suspecting you ain't never gonna understand how your mindless list o' quotes generated via a search engine sans meaningful context did not reveal some kinda proof o' the western media's efforts to embiggen pahlavi. so go ahead, deflect s'more, and then wish into existence new defenses for your initial lazy misrepresentation. is what you do. you do poorly, and am admitting we do derive embarrassing entertainment in revealing your reflexive frauds, but am knowing you cannot help your self. HA! Good Fun!

Man shot and killed by federal officers in Minnesota was an ICU nurse, his parents say https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/24/us/minneapolis-shooting-federal-agents-video.html https://www.facebook.com/KARE11/photos/breaking-news-this-is-alex-pretti-the-man-shot-and-killed-by-a-federal-agent-in-/1443651944471241/

a wizard of earthsea is one o' our favorite fantasy works, so we read every couple of years. HA! Good Fun!

battletech extended (BEX) have been playing battletech advanced and rogutech since those mods were released, but never played BEX. am shocked by how much we enjoy bex. is more stable compared to bta and roguetech. the bex mech lab offers fewer options, and initiative and evasion is handled more like the base game than the other mods mentioned, but am near completing a full merc career and am just about to start fighting the clans; start year for our career is 3047. am likely gonna play until am able to field as many dire wolves and warhawks as we please, although am disappointed the bex omnimechs is nevertheless having hardpoints. one thing we especial miss from roguetech is the inability to be able to choose where am dropping on a map. bex frequent drops us in the middle o' multiple enemy lances with the back o' our out-of-cover stalkers typical pointed at least a half dozen mechs with better initiative. whatever. point is that am having more fun than expected. admission: other than fritz (chess,) is few computer games am having invested more hours into than battletech. sux that hairbrained weren't able to do a sequel. HA! Good Fun!

clarification: as vulgar as this is, it is legal... for now. a domestic terrorist database created by collecting public available and non-private information, is not prohibited by law. unless and until there is a specific Congressional law prohibiting government databases created by collecting public available and non-private information, we gotta rely on scotus decisions to articulate the scope o' privacy contemplated by the Constitution. scotus Justices is tending to be luddites--not only are they old, but their job is to see patterns in the law by looking backwards (oftentimes centuries) in search o' meaningful legal precedent. also, acknowledging that the US Constitution don't specific mention privacy, the Court is reluctant to push further the boundaries o' a penumbral fundamental right. use domestic terrorist to label a database which includes peaceful protesters exercising their first amendment rights should be political and moral repugnant, but it isn't illegal... yet. until such a time the label becomes material in a case or controversy, until a person is denied a government benefit or legal protection 'cause o' their existence in the domestic terrorist database, the courts don't have any kinda power to require the dissolution o' such a database. am assuming a pre 2024 Court would put the kibosh on a domestic terrorist database that were used to deny rights and privileges to those who did exercise their First Amendment rights, but... HA! Good Fun!

and Not opening the door to ICE may no longer stop officers Most immigration arrests have been carried out under administrative warrants, documents issued by immigration authorities that authorize an arrest. Traditionally they do not permit officers to enter private spaces without consent. Only warrants signed by independent judges have carried that authority. there is no basis for dhs creating new authority for law enforcement. claiming it is proper to keep relying on administrative warrants 'cause o' some kinda self granted power ginned up in a dhs memo is something jd vances knows is not Constitutional. nevertheless, am having little doubt feds will continue to enter homes/residences up until scotus tells 'em they cannot do so. how many people were sent out o' the US before scotus said there needs be some kinda due process review? once those people were out o' the US, as a practical and legal matter, courts could not force the US to bring those improperly "deported" persons back to the US. scotus has been using the shadow docket to undermine lower court TROs without providing rationales for overturning district and appellate courts. as far as we can tell, the scotus majority has decided that only scotus has the authority to enjoin the executive branch... although am needing mention the curious lisa cook exception. Since Trump took office last year, the court – on its interim docket – has allowed him to remove members of the National Labor Relations Board, Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Merit Systems Protection Board. The justices also heard arguments in December in the case of Rebecca Slaughter, a member of the Federal Trade Commission whom Trump fired in March. They are expected to decide by summer whether a federal law that bars him from removing members of the FTC except in cases of “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office” violates the constitutional separation of powers. explain why a fed appointee is legal different than an ftc board appointee is difficult 'cause scotus has provided no explanation. however, if scotus treats the dhs memo authority same as most other fed actions, it could be a long time before they get around to telling vance that administrative warrants don't fulfill 4th amendment requirements. how many US residents get "deported" before scotus decides to observe that water is wet and ice is cold... although following the Presidential immunity case, am no longer certain what constitutes legal unthinkable for this Court. ... sure this is wrong, but kamala harris woulda' done... something. HA! Good Fun!

so, still focusing on the sophistry you complained 'bout? color us not surprised. hypocritical and deceptive. telling us you used a search engine is not linking and is not meaningful attribution. you quoted grammerly as a source and grammerly made extreme clear why you should include attribution and links. "Remember to attribute your quotes properly to maintain transparency and build trust with your audience. Make sure the source is clear, and use their exact words to avoid misrepresentation." you are the joker who observed earlier that people rare read beyond the first paragraph or two as some kinda lazy-arsed defense o' your own lazy-arsed search engine efforts. ("Every single quote I picked was in the first few lines of the articles. Most (all but one?) of them were in the lead or second paragraph. ie the part people actually read, and which gets summarised by search engines.") but failure to link and attribute makes it far less likely people will catch your deceit, yes? and we both know it is misrepresentation; "you're wrong about that." is why we did link the stories you failed to attribute and shared the conclusions and analysis from the stories which made clear the equivocation and ambivalence o' the authors regarding the significance o' pahlavi. we also revealed qualitative same quotes from al jazeera, which kinda undercuts your complaint o' some kinda western skew. oh, and if we put words into a search engine and it provides a long list o' results, it don't mean that western media is making efforts to "embiggen" whatever it is we were searching. duh on same day you did your mindless search engine population, you coulda' gone instead with madonna + iran and seen dozens o' results. seems you don't know how to use a search engine after all. again, do a search for iran + protests and see how frequent you get results for pahlavi in headline and ledes. if the west were so hot to embiggen, would we not see pahlavi showing up in ledes and headlines o' the foremost returns? using an anonymous search, so as to avoid algorithm issues, we again did a search today for iran + protests and get zero results for pahlavi in the ledes and headlines produced in the first sixty western stories. of course if you do a targeted search for pahlavi, you will generate numerous results, but the mere existence o' results will often be misleading. unless you are specific searching for pahlavi, there is a good chance you would see him as irrelevant, 'cause he is getting only the most infrequent mentions in the headlines and ledes o' western news stories regarding the iranian protests. again, you were the guy stressing how little o' articles people read as some kinda defense o' your sloth and decption. oh and again, the first paragraph o' a story is not "always a summary" as you claimed. heck, the first paragraph don't always include a summary lede, which is not but a hook + essential facts. your grammerly link didn't say what you claim it did any more than your mindless quote list, but since you put so much in search engine results... ai result from google for "summary of a news article: A summary of a news article is a concise, objective overview that captures the central message and key facts of the original story without including personal opinions. Core Elements of a News Summary An effective summary typically addresses the "5 Ws and H" to provide a complete picture of the event: Who: The primary people, groups, or organizations involved. What: The central event, topic, or main conflict. Where: The specific location where the event occurred. When: The timing or date of the events. Why: The reason, cause, or purpose behind the event. How: The process or methods described in the story. Essential Steps for Writing Survey the Article: Read the headline and the first paragraph (the "lede") first, as these often contain the most critical information. Identify Main Points: Note the author's thesis or main claim and the major arguments or evidence supporting it. Draft in Your Own Words: Write the summary using your own phrasing to avoid plagiarism, typically keeping it to about one-third the length of the original article. Acknowledge the Source: Begin by identifying the article's title, author, and publication in the first sentence. Maintain Objectivity: Stick to the facts presented in the text and avoid adding your own analysis or critique. Structure of a Summary Introduction: A single sentence introducing the article and its main argument. Body: A series of sentences explaining each supporting point in the same order as the original article. Conclusion: A final statement that summarizes the thesis and explains the overall significance or implications of the story. your search engine generated quotes, which you failed to link and attribute, (naughty) typical weren't even fulfilling the requirements o' summary ledes as described by grammerly, but nowhere near reaching the level o' meaningful summaries. your primary school edumactaion were lacking if you believe your mindless search population results were meaningful summaries, but we do not believe you are so ignorant... 'bout summaries. clown show shenanigans, but please, don't stop. HA! Good Fun!

trump's most successful diplomatic and trade efforts is tacoing. tariffs is most noteworthy for trump delays, exceptions and implementation fails. ukraine had to compromise by thanksgiving... but maybe he meant next thanksgiving? am suspecting the new greenland deal is gonna be near indistinguishable from the old greenland deal, which is good news for everybody. etc. the problem is that trump is unlikely to taco if the bond market fails to react. blowing up boats in the caribbean didn't move the needle and so trump decided a coup would be a fun thing to do in venezuela. regardless, this "concept o' a deal" 'tween nato and trump is a real life application o' sun tzu's advice: build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across. am thinking the nobel committee should keep a medal for trump in their pocket just in case it looks as if the very stable genius is about to start ww3. ... we got at least three more years o' this insanity. HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

ironic. *chuckle* you never offered a meaningful argument in support o' your conclusion, but you did complain a fair bit about sophistry and semantics in spite o' you being the clown to invoke grammerly ('cause that meaningful bolstered your contention that there is a western media effort to "embiggen" pahlavi. HA!) and your impotent attempts to redefine ledes. is repetitive buffoonery and includes more than a little o' your trademark deceit where you misrepresent sources. and 'cause you got a predictable misunderstanding o' logic, is no shock you use strawman wrong, though am thinking this is one o' your ignorance fails as 'posed to deception. strawman is a fallacy where an individual false attribute an argument to another, and then proceeds to knock the stuffing out o' the imagined argument. is not a fantasy that you are bozoing an argument that ledes = meaningful summaries, and that, "The first paragraph of an article is always a summary." is nothing made up about our description o' your argument. you keep doubling down on those points although they don't meaningful advance your material conclusion. wait, you don't genuine think that 'cause we crafted the old man and the sea lede it counts as strawman, 'cause that would be HI-larious. so much for your grasp o' your primary school english lessons, eh? once again, you posted a bunch o' quotes, without links or attribution. naughty. furthermore, the stories from which you lifted the quotes, relying on nothing save a mindless search engine population, undermine your conclusion that western media were attempting to embiggen the relevance o' pahlavi, while ignoring the fact non western media such as al jazeera were making near identical quotes about pahlavi, and how in spite o' his recent news conference and the hacking efforts interrupting iranian tv, there is extreme few pahlavi stories showing up in a search o' iran + protests. so much for the western embiggen scheme. serious, zor needs musical accompaniment for his... contributions. counting on most people to be unaware when you fib or expecting 'em not to go through the effort o' checking your sources is your schtick. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna suggest that's the portion o' the letter which resonates most with hardcore maga. the maga movement has been so successful 'cause it channels outrage and grievance o' white americans, particular white and working class americans. is the folks living in rural america who feel as if they has been marginalized and ridiculed for decades while the libs talk about reparations for slavery and the "feminazis" push dei programs. their manufacturing jobs go to mexico, vietnam and china and all the libs wanna talk about is white privilege? now the real trick is that trump has managed to convince maga that his personal grievances is theirs. whenever trump is mocked for saying something ignorant, or he is investigated for business fraud, the ultimate motivation behind those efforts by the deep state and george soros to diminish trump is the destruction of maga. it's not 4d chess. as long as trump is channeling outrage and grievance, the maga base will cheer for him. HA! Good Fun!

am clear not gonna complain about getting drawn into a tangential discussion, particular when is more intriguing than the ones am having indulged recent. HA! Good Fun!

had same here at approximate same time. that said, am thinking you are expecting too much from steube and/or his voters everglades fog is the stuff o' legends, but asking folks to make the connection 'tween swamp fog or ocean advection fog (which is a common occurrence in florida with all that ocean frontage, yes?) and chemtrails is a bit like getting seth rich conspiracy believers to face facts. offer facts and expert sources and you are simultaneous galvanizing florida man. it doesn't need to make sense. HA! Good Fun! ps got an unwanted cliff clavin trivia fact. am recollecting there is numerous florida indian tribes that have common creation myth elements. one such-- in the beginning there were fog. a few o' the florida indian creation myths start not like genesis with nothingness and darkness, but rather with fog. am gonna go out on a limb and hypothesize the creek and seminole were familiar with persistent fog. pps we shouldn't have identified creek and seminole as indian tribes with the fog creation myth, but taking out now feels like cheating. our +20 year remote source mentioned "native americans" and "florida" so we reflexive thought creek and seminole, but am not certain 'bout which peoples o' florida shared the primeval fog myth.

actually, no it doesn't. more deception or ignorance. summary lede label describes the kinda lede. "you're going to need a bigger boat." elderly cuban fisherman loses record-setting marlin to sharks. is not a summary o' old man and the sea anymore than is most o' your not linked and not attributed quotes. heck, you claimed, with your typical ignorant certainty, that, "The first paragraph of an article is always a summary." *chuckle* ledes is, by their nature and limitations, not meaningful summaries. a summary lede hooks and provides essential facts... though again, not all your supplied ledes were summary ledes. and 'course all you have been doing now for multiple posts is the hypocritical sophistry nonsense you complain 'bout--you never provided any genuine support for your confirmation bias reliant conclusion other than to state you lifted quotes from search engine results, after which you added a list o' rando quotes sans any attribution or links and no genuine support for how these rando links, by their mere existence, supports your conclusion that western media were active trying to "embiggen" pahlavi... a guy who has shown up 2x in four days based o' the first 60 search engine results each day for iran + protests in spite o' the fact he had an hour long news conference on the 16th... not to mention the fact that anybody reading the articles you did not link or attribute (bad zor) would realize just how equivocal and ambivalent they were insofar as pahlavi's newfound relevance to iranians. heck, we pulled quotes from al jazeera that were functional identical to the western quotes you found meaningful and egregious. "anyone who has completed primary school," would mock your efforts as you did not link or attribute your rando quotes, and you didn't even meaningful support your hasty and overbroad generalization with anything but the list o' rando quotes produced by a search engine. the fact you thinks ledes = meaningful summaries, and your efforts to ignore how your own unattributed sources undermine your conclusion, would be derided by primary school teachers everywhere; again, no primary school teacher would give you passing marks for mindless quoting a lede verbatim as being equivalent o' summarizing an article. primary school teachers would chastise your efforts as lazy and deceptive, though no doubt they would use as a teaching moment regardless o' the scorn and ridicule your efforts deserve. and given that your only support for your initial conclusion following your initial flawed quote-list post is to argue semantics, am guessing the primary school education you received were either substandard or it didn't stick. we lived in chicago, so we got a soft spot for clowns with a daily act, but... am admitted curious to see just how many rakes zor will trip over before one o' us loses patience. HA! Good Fun!

new florida man entry am placing here 'cause this kinda willful (and quite possible performative) ignorance is increasingly normal in US politics. too many voters believe stoopid and being corrected about their stoopid makes 'em more likely to become angry with smarty-pants experts. people has always been stoopid. the difference is that in the past, people knew they were ignorant about a whole host o' subjects and issues, so they put their trust in experts. 'cause o' the internet, nowadays every yahoo believes their confirmation bias skewed research makes 'em experts on health, medicine, military tactics, tariffs and soros-funded space lasers. politicians, some o' whom is as ignorant as voters, but many know better, embrace stoopid conspiracy theories such as chemtrails and seth rich because they know the libs is gonna aggressive correct 'em. obtuse voters who believe seth rich stoopid see one o' the politicians from their team being criticized by know-it-all reporters, experts and libs, and even if they don't particular like Congressman steube, they hate reporters, experts and libs. vote steube is a thumb in the eye o' experts, reporters and libs. ... 'course recognizing the problem ain't gonna stop us from laughing at the florida man stuff. HA! Good Fun!

agreed. too little attention for this point. Buy Greenland? Take It? Why? An Old Pact Already Gives Trump a Free Hand. Analysts say the Cold War agreement allows the president to increase the American military presence almost at will. Under a little-known Cold War agreement, the United States already enjoys sweeping military access in Greenland. Right now, the United States has one base in a very remote corner of the island. But the agreement allows it to “construct, install, maintain, and operate” military bases across Greenland, “house personnel” and “control landings, takeoffs, anchorages, moorings, movements, and operation of ships, aircraft, and waterborne craft.” It was signed in 1951 by the United States and Denmark, which colonized Greenland more than 300 years ago and still controls some of its affairs. “The U.S. has such a free hand in Greenland that it can pretty much do what it wants,” said Mikkel Runge Olesen, a researcher at the Danish Institute for International Studies in Copenhagen. “I have a very hard time seeing that the U.S. couldn’t get pretty much everything it wanted,” he said, adding, “if it just asked nicely.” ... The fear was that Nazis could use Greenland as a steppingstone to America. The Germans had already established small meteorological bases on the island’s east coast and relayed information for battles in Europe. American troops eventually ousted them and established more than a dozen bases there with thousands of troops, landing strips and other military facilities. After World War II, the United States continued to run some bases and a string of early warning radar sites. As the Cold War wound down, the United States closed all of them except one. It’s now called the Pittufik Space Base and helps track missiles crossing the North Pole. end at one time, the US had something like seventeen bases in greenland, although "bases" can be misleading as a few listening stations described as bases were likely a building or two manned by a handful o' people, but our understanding is that the people in greenland and denmark were, by and large, perfectly fine with the arrangement. no surprise as there isn't much meaningful industry in greenlandl, and the US presence meant there were business opportunities for greenlanders who is significant supported by government assistance programs. this is all so stoopid... unless you accept the equal ridiculous suggestion that the greenland nonsense is due to the fact greenland appears extreme large on flat maps, and trump wants to add the huge island to his real estate portfolio. longitude demarcations at the equator is +111 km apart and at the north pole they all converge and therefore is 0 km apart, so on many flat maps, greenland appears much larger than it is in reality. trump sees acquisition o' greenland as akin to the louisiana purchase or alaska, and he is convinced acquiring the property would be a major benefit to his personal brand. based on reporting from folks such as susan glasser, trump was just as obsessed with greenland in term 1, but the sane folks surrounding the President always managed to deflect his attention to something more meaningful, but there is far less sanity to be found in trump 2.0. this is all just so dumb, and yet republicans in Congress and the trump administration who know better has decided to unapologetic go all in on what should be a comical emperor's new clothes bit, but even Gromnir is having difficulty seeing the humor in this idiocy. HA! Good Fun!

this video were sent to us and am of the opinion it is worth watching... perhaps a couple times. however, keep in mind that just 'cause you got rights it don't mean that you should tell a cop to engage in improbable acts o' prurient self gratification as an alternative to you complying with their demands. HA! Good Fun!

first, the placement o' the quotes as being from the first paragraph is irrelevant 'cause your context was, again, "And on Pahlavi, taking the first ten search engine results for reza pahlavi (exc wikipedia/ brittanica and revapahlavi.org) over the past four days." that's it. no claim you were defacto summarizing by posting ledes (HA!) your context was the above quote followed by rando quotes which grammerly told you in no uncertain terms you should identify and attribute sources. is understandable why you would avoid link and attribute, 'cause other than Gromnir, who is gonna bother to hunt down the source material and read all such articles only to discover that the stories, in their full context, do not in fact promote or "embiggen" pahlavi? 'course this is ordinary zor misdirection and fibbing, so is not shocking. duh. but you now wanna focus on definitions o' lede? color us not at all shocked. you may post giant font and continue to deflect, but nobody in their right mind would accept a list o' quotes sans context as meaningful summaries, even if those brief lines shares were, after the fact, described by zor as ledes, o' which summary ledes is but a single example... which should hardly be shock as a few o' you ledes left out who, what, where, why and/or how essentials. duh. and essential facts + hook ≠ a meaningful summary. just because something has the word "summary" in it's descriptor, does not mean it is in fact a meaningful summary. if what you shared were in fact summaries, there wouldn't be any need to add the lede qualifier. even the most generous primary school teacher would chastise zor for simply quoting a lede verbatim if she/he asked you for summaries. duh am assuming you ain't this obtuse, so the alternate must be deceit. 'course you complaining about sophistry insofar as lede definitions is comical ironic. you did not in fact claim that you were posting a list of summaries to defend your claim that western media were acting to "embiggen" the relevance o' pahlavi. heck, you did not even suggest you were posting a list of summary ledes... which woulda' been inaccurate too. you did not describe your rando quotes as ledes until multi posts following your initial buffoonery. nope, you posted the following: "And on Pahlavi, taking the first ten search engine results for reza pahlavi (exc wikipedia/ brittanica and revapahlavi.org) over the past four days," followed by a bunch o' unlinked quotes, which grammerly folks most certainly would criticize as, at best, bad form. but here we are again with zor purposeful misrepresenting articles he linked... though am happy to see you at least linked the lede stuff. baby steps. oh, and again, o' the first sixty news articles returned by an iran + protests google search o' news articles, only one had pahlavi mentioned in the headline or lede. your embiggen claim looks increasingly pathetic... not least 'cause if anybody had read the articles which were the source o' your rando quotes they woulda' discovered just how equivocal and ambivalent were the opinions about pahlavi's relevance. time is a flat circle. we keep bringing back to the relevant issue, but you wanna argue ledes ... which you also can't help but misrepresent. am having stated more than once that the self-identifying libertarians is, as often as not, lukewarm republicans pretending to have some kinda intellectual integrity. the nra started out as a glorified gun club, but when it first became involved in lobbying efforts, it was dedicated to promoting firearm restrictions. “I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons,” said Karl T. Frederick (nra president... and a 3x olympic gold medal winner in shooting events,) according to a transcript of the hearings. “I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses." and later, during the civil rights era, the nra became firebrands at the forefront for gun control. quite the mystery, eh? sadly, am thinking that if the woman in the image @HoonDing shared answered the door of her home, openly carrying a firearm, most o' those gadsen flag waving 2nd amendment patriots would be ok with federal officers shooting her as the woman in hospital scrubs would be creating a reasonable apprehension o' imminent harm to those law enforcement personnel. at best, the they are all bad clown car libertarians would try and convince you that if kamala harris had been elected, the same thing would be happening but it would be ranchers in montana or preachers in tenessee being deprived o' their rights instead of lesbians in minneapolis and venezuelan nationals in louisiana. most libertarians is terrible hypocrites... and am having spoken with only a handful who know the history of firearms legislation in the US. HA! Good Fun!

is strange the norwegians felt the need to make such a post... albeit no more weird than trump accepting machado's medal. ... am pretty sure lawrence taylor's superbowl xxv ring sold for near $250,000, but most go for less than $50k. with all the sh!t coin money trump has amassed, he can buy a superbowl ring for every finger w/o hardly noticing. owning the rings might make him feel more manly and save the rest o' us from the price o' his insecurities? heck, if trump would agree to retire before the midterms, and take at least stephen miller and rfk jr with him, we would buy him a handful o' such jewelry and consider it money well spent. HA! Good Fun!

warning: sweary until it is definitively proven otherwise, am gonna assume the linked "protester" is @Bartimaeus. am gonna read all future barti posts with that voice and the colorful turns of expression fixed in our imagination. HA! Good Fun!

deflect much? "And on Pahlavi, taking the first ten search engine results for reza pahlavi (exc wikipedia/ brittanica and revapahlavi.org) over the past four days" that was your context, which is not meaningful context at all. also not true. a journalist's lede is not necessarily a summary and am suspecting you are again purposeful misreading and misrepresenting. as your links reveal, the lede is an attention grabbing line or two which hooks the reader and presents essential facts. there is distinct summary ledes, but even those is not properly described as summaries o' an article. a summary lede simple identifies the the who, what, where and when (why and how is all too frequent absent from the lede, which is in part why we got the phrase "bury the lede" as part of common vernacular,) as well as including the emotional hook. @Hurlshotteaches middle school, so is not perfect, but am expecting that if he asked his students to summarize a multipage article and all they did was quote the lede verbatim, he might fail the student... well, nowadays am suspecting the student might be given a c-. you posted ledes, one sentence (two sentences in one case?,) lifted from internet searches (without attribution as grammerly reminds you is vital-- "Remember to attribute your quotes properly to maintain transparency and build trust with your audience. Make sure the source is clear, and use their exact words to avoid misrepresentation.") and then you slapped on your own gestalt conclusion, sans support, about what those on or two sentences revealed about a general effort by western media to "embiggen" the significance o' pahlavi. your conclusion were not part o' the ledes o' the stories you quoted and suggestion that such a conclusion were obvious simple 'cause you selective quoted from a handful of articles is the product o' your typical rake stepping. again, journalists is mentioning pahlavi 'cause curiously, iranians had been invoking pahlavi. as grammerly observes, ledes set "the tone for the story and delivers the core facts to hook the reader." pahlavi getting love from iranians don't make much sense to Gromnir and to many westerners, so is hardly surprising journalists would write articles to explain the unexpected situation. al jazeera has now posted multiple articles on the subject o' pahlavi and his support with iranians in exile as well as those chanting his name in the streets of iran. is eye-brow raising facts which hook the reader. grammerly would be proud. the articles you lifted quotes from did indeed speak about pahlavi and his possible relevance to the moment, so nothing contrary to the observations gleaned from your single sentence lift o' rando articles sans attribution, but you reached a conclusion not supported by the actual content o' most o' those articles you quoted and you provided no support for you rather grandiose conclusion sans the mere existence o' those brief snippets you discovered via a mindless search engine population. ignorant or deceptive? am s'posing both is possible. past zor efforts reveal that your ignorance and deceit tends to be symbiotic, but am not sure if the deceit is defensive or calculated. regardless, sharp_one, wrath of dragon and now zor. three stooges quoting articles which as often as not refute your positions. again, you didn't post summaries. your quotes were ledes-one sentence (and in one case two sentences? *gasp*) from an internet population sans your links to those articles. your context was as follows: "And on Pahlavi, taking the first ten search engine results for reza pahlavi (exc wikipedia/ brittanica and revapahlavi.org) over the past four days." as am having shown multiple times now, after reading the articles it becomes apparent to readers that the articles you quoted is tending towards ambivalence and equivocation regarding the significance o' pahlavi, so your continued after-the-fact defense appears, at best, desperate. you have recognized the equivocation, but nevertheless attributed a widespread western effort 'cause o' the mere mention o' pahlavi's relevance to iranian protesters in the first paragraph or two o' articles? tragic. HA! Good Fun! ps for funsies we did a google story population search for "iran" + "protests" the headline, sub-head and lede for story 24: Deposed Shah’s Son Seeks Center Stage Amid Iran Protests Reza Pahlavi, living in exile in the United States, has long marketed himself as a future leader of Iran. His father’s repressive legacy casts a long shadow. As mass protests have swept Iran, some Iranians have called for an unexpected figure to take center stage — Reza Pahlavi, scion of the Pahlavi monarchs who ruled Iran before their ouster 47 years ago. underlined portion of the lede is missing... 'cause y'know, mindless internet searches is gonna cut off based on character count. ... Analysts say it is difficult to assess how many Iranians on the ground seriously hope Mr. Pahlavi would return as a future leader, because of both a government-imposed internet blackout and his own polarizing reputation. His critics accuse him of exaggerating his support within the country, and say they face frequent harassment and threats from his supporters. ... Mr. Pahlavi also most likely needs the vote of another man who seems equally skeptical of his relevance: President Trump. Asked last week whether he would meet with Mr. Pahlavi, Mr. Trump demurred and suggested it would be better to see how things played out. after the following story, number 60, we grew bored o' the exercise o' attempting to gauge just how much the western media were attempting to "embiggen" pahlavi's relevance.

Republicans Block Effort to Check Trump’s Power in Venezuela Mr. Hawley and Mr. Young were part of a group of five Republicans who last week joined all Democrats in supporting the measure aiming to curb the president’s war powers. ... Mr. Hawley said that assurances from Mr. Rubio in the letter, and in phone calls from both the secretary and Mr. Trump, had convinced him that the resolution was no longer needed. ... couldn't help but flashback to HA! Good Fun!

again, am not certain if is deceit or legit ignorant, though is requiring brobdingnagian ignorance to lean in that direction. even you could see the lines you lifted from your internet searches did not meaningful represent the articles portrayal o' pahlavi, which is hardly surprising as the search engine results is mindless extraction of snippets from the first two paragraphs o' sometimes longish stories. those stories (and the american-but-nevertheless-western articles we linked *eye-roll*) attempt to explain the possible significance o' the iranian pahlavi photos and chants in crowds o' protesters and oft times reach ambivalent conclusions. we s'pose you learned about conclusions in primary school? conclusions is important too, but am thinking @Hurlshot would regrettable need give you a poor grade if you ignored everything in-between the intro and conclusion when testing for your reading comprehension o' a source, but you ignored conclusions as well, so... nevertheless, in spite o' being confronted over and over with both western and non western sources who is recognizing the invocation o' pahlavi's name by iranian protesters without painting him as heroic or even with a skew towards his legit relevance, insist that your lazy-arsed search engine selective-quoting is a defense to your failure to link the stories and abrogating your responsibility to show what those stories actual said 'bout pahlavi. no meaningful context to the quotes sans to say, "And on Pahlavi, taking the first ten search engine results for reza pahlavi (exc wikipedia/ brittanica and revapahlavi.org) over the past four days" okie dokey. beyond all reason, and in spite o' being confronted now by numerous western and non western stories which undermine any reasonable conclusion that there is an organized effort to "embiggen" pahlavi's standing, you cleave to your initial hasty generalization based on what? laziness? deceit? unlinked snippets from internet search summaries? serious. nevertheless, is good to know am able to add you to our list along with sharp_one and wrath of dragon who excused their posting o' articles which undermined their position 'cause those articles showed up in an internet search. bravo. you enjoy special company. unrelated to zor's typical defense o' the indefensible, Federal prosecutors resign over concerns about probe into Minneapolis ICE shooting, source says At least six prosecutors with the U.S. attorney’s office in Minnesota have resigned over their concerns with the direction of the investigation into the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer, a person familiar with the resignations told NBC News on Tuesday. ... Within the main Justice Department in Washington, at least six leaders at the criminal section of the Civil Rights Division were taking early retirement, two people familiar with the matter told NBC News. A third person familiar with the departures said that they were planned before the Minnesota shooting. end am gonna note carol leonning is also reporting that the civil rights division attorneys who resigned were considering leaving the doj before the renee good shooting, but the events in minneapolis clarified and hastened their decisions. twelve resignations so far, and it's only wednesday. 'course the french is likely more concerned with greenland, but as is so infrequent we find ourself in agreement with the french or am able to appreciate their humor, honor demands we admit to having chuckled when we saw the 30 rock bit. à votre santé. HA! Good Fun!