PA Ram wrote:

I do appreciate the police though–the good ones. Society could not work without them.

———————-

Well, i appreciate plumbers. And teachers. And social workers. And used-book-store operators. And oceanographers. …and cops, too. But the thing is…there is an ‘element’ in police-world that annoys the hell out of me. Usually part of that element involves the F.O.P. spokespeople. Its the element that demands Unconditional support. They whine way too much for my taste. I mean, if you became a cop you wanted the job. You know its dangerous at times, and you know its thankless at times….blah blah blah. But you wanted it. So, dont be whining for Unconditional Support. Sometimes it just seems like a lot of cops seem like big babies if cop-world gets any serious criticism. Bnw would say, “buck up”… Yada yada yada…

I mean, I’m a lawyer, but i dont run around asking/demanding everyone love lawyers.
Hell, i dont like’em myself. …what was my point? I forget.

w
v

• This reply was modified 9 years, 10 months ago by wv.

I dunno. I got nuthin.

But i do find it interesting how technology is bringing all of this stuff
onto our computer screens. I mean everyone in America has a camera-phone now.
I’m sure the police and the nonpolice
are aware they are almost always on camera.

w
v

zn wrote:

Samuel Jackson

————–
OMG, that was awesome.

And I’ve been complaining about not enuff dragon-time
since the show began.

Yeah, i woulda made it about the fuckin DRAGONS
if’n it had been my game….

w
v

Zooey wrote:

Well, his options were to 1) do nothing, 2) run with Stein, 3) endorse Hillary.

None of those are good options, but #1 accomplishes nothing but makes him appear spineless, #2 at best pulls the DNC to the left in 2020 but probably at the expense of a Trump presidencty, and #3 lives to fight another day. And he was going to have to fight another day even if he was elected president because none of his proposals were going to become reality without continuous fighting. It was a pragmatic choice, however tough to swallow.

I saw about 3 minutes of Hillary’s speech, and she sounded a lot like Bernie.

What becomes of all of that after the election is uncertain, of course. And given Hillary’s track record, she ain’t likely to fight hard for any of it. But Bernie at least has some status within the senate now to the point other politicians will have to listen to what he says.

And that’s the upshot. That’s what he won. And as insufficient as it is, it is a higher waterline than we have seen in 50 years in this country.

So…thanks, Bernie.

—————-
Well said.

w
v
“We know what we are, but not what we may be.”
― William Shakespeare

So, what would spawn a parade?

8 wins?
9 wins?

What if they win 7 again? Would that earn Fisher
a nick-name?

w
v

That was very good, i thot. I will keep an eye on that
writer-footballplayer.

w
v

“type-writer feet”

w
v

Yeah, fascinating stuff. I am not really all that informed on all the nuances
of ‘gender’. I just kinda know the gender 101 stuff.

I am gender-ignorant. Thats a new category, i just invented, btw. Add it to the list.

btw, apparently this is a purty famous book:
The Gender Book
https://www.buzzfeed.com/lilyhiottmillis/the-gender-book-everyone-should-read?utm_term=.fmNNQxZxo#.msnD1363V

https://uniteyouthdublin.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/gender-booklet.pdf
w
v

• This reply was modified 9 years, 10 months ago by wv.

bnw wrote:

Yes I was against not because I had proof but because it didn’t pass the smell test. It was about personal revenge on dubya’s part as well as an oil grab.

============

Well, yes, Oil and Bush’s macho/insecure personality played a part,
I’d say.

Oil plays a part in a lot of Dem/Rep algebra,
it seems. Control the oil-spigot and you control/influence
other governments. I’m oversimplifying obviously.

btw, i am pleased to see that you can pick on a Replicant.
The Decider was about as bad as it gets.

w
v
“Perhaps, when we remember wars, we should take off our clothes and paint ourselves blue and go on all fours all day long and grunt like pigs. That would surely be more appropriate than noble oratory and shows of flags and well-oiled guns.”
― Kurt Vonnegut, Cat’s Cradle

Zooey wrote:

zn wrote:

“It is now clear that policy on Iraq was made on the basis of flawed intelligence and assessments. … They were not challenged,” Chilcot writes in his statement that accompanied the report’s release.

Flawed.

There it is right there. That’s the fig leaf the establishment has put on this tragic debacle.

“Flawed” suggests that “Hey, we did the best we could, but we are only human, and humans sometimes get things wrong. We trusted our Intelligence apparatus, but for some flukey reason we wouldn’t like to specifically investigate, they made some mistakes, and gosh darn it.”

It wasn’t flawed. It was falsified, and exaggerated. Outright fabrications. Lies of omission. False narratives. And the burden of proof was placed on Iraq to prove a negative – like prove to me you’re not cheating on your wife. You can’t prove that. You can’t prove you don’t have something.

We also knew that even if they did have WMD, they were no good because they were well past their expiration date. We also knew there was no evidence that Iraq intended to use them even if they had them.

The burden of proof has to be on the government that starts the war. And the world recognized that which is why most of the planet opposed the invasion.

Flawed.

===================

Yup. My thots exactly.

And its what I always expect when the system
investigates itself.

w
v