Trump is regarded by Putin (and maybe most Russians) as what the Jews call a "mensch"---a regular guy of decent impulses and admirable stamina and courage. The Russians admire strength, stamina, courage to a degree that goes beyond the somewhat vain word "machismo." I think they can accept Trump as someone they can deal with, in a spirit of mutual respect.
False alarm. If you read the text of the source article, it says that she stated the cause was being overwhelmed by her relationship with her father. No mention of Trump or the election. Somebody at KIRO 7 decided to embellish the facts by drafting a misleading headline.
Another way of looking at it would be that the MSM is the choir, but the congregation has gotten tired of hearing its lyrics and has been slowly filing out the doors for years. They are truly singing to themselves, under the misconception that they are the conveyors of the truth. When the propagandists begin to believe their own propaganda, they have entered the Palace of Psychosis. We must understand that what we are facing is not only or merely a difference of political opinion, but truly a clash of insanity vs. sanity. It is NOT POSSIBLE to "reconcile" the two. Reality (sanity) must prevail.
It still sticks with me. If I have a problem expressing a sentence, I sometimes get out of it by asking myself "How would I diagram this sentence?" And it always helps me sort out subject vs. object nouns and pronouns. I don't say this publicly out of a desire not to seem arrogant, but my general attitude is "If you don't know how to diagram your own sentence, then you don't know what the fuck you are saying."
I like their platter of doughnuts! Class in every detail.
I agree with the above comments that the government should be entirely hands-off with respect to education funding and control (one goes with the other). But---nothing prevents the government from establishing educational standards for its own staff employment and military training. And rating the state high schools, colleges, and universities according to this standard. Maybe restore the practice of employment tests to see if applicants measure up. Once it turns out that a bachelor's degree in basket-weaving gives you a flunking grade on your application for a government position (e.g., accounting), there will be a Great Smelling of the Coffee.
I grew up with school cafeterias and school buses in the 50s and 60s. There was nothing terrible about it. It was simple food and simple transportation, and no one got up in a whirl about it. I have more memories of the classrooms than of these aspects.
My prescription is to return largely to the course content and textbooks of my father's generation in the 1930s. I read his textbook on grammar. College level, with details about what punctuation marks there are and how to use them. I read a textbook on home economics (cooking) and it was almost like reading a chemistry text, explaining what goes on in the chemistry of baking bread. There is a very clear and substantial thesis that, once it was accepted that everyone needed to go to college, the high schools relaxed all their standards. The prior attitude was that a high school diploma was as far as most children would go in their formal education, so the idea was to cram in as much as possible. My high school taught courses in English Literature, Mathematics up to calculus, Geography & History, French, German, Spanish, and Latin, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and Shopwork. Not to mention electives in Art, Music, and Theater. The marching band was the pride of the town. Today, its music building is a demolished memory.
The way that most people pay their loans is often as much as they can do. That's not the way I pay my loans, but I am lucky enough to have a choice in the matter due to my income level. I worked numbers for a living, so you don't need to explain compound interest to me.
You have a stunted idea of what an "investment" is. An automobile provides mobility, to enable employment, commercial application, or home-related logistics, all of which would be far more expensive than to hire transportation. Similarly for a house, that spares you from rent, provides shelter, and amenities of life. According to you, we should never purchase anything on time but only obtain things by rent? It is to avoid rent that we tolerate time payment. I don't know who is teaching you anything, but it does not seem to be life. And, by the way, "the government" didn't teach me anything about automobiles or houses.
The bottom line remains that taking out a loan for whatever purpose is a free act between free individuals, to the mutual benefit of both parties. If you want to avoid taking out a loan in your life, have at it. No one is interfering. But I do object to your desire to interfere in how I live my financial life, since you offer no plausible alternatives. You seem to want a world of rentals---with all their restrictions on use---and that would make the WEF happy as clams: no one would own anything, and we would all be happy.
Anons need to understand that you can't responsibly claim that "shit" is being sprayed in the air without hard evidence for such a claim. (It is also absurd to think that such an expensive and time-consuming method is used for disposal when there are other, more immediate and inexpensive approaches.)
"Natural Born" comes from a contemporaneous reference for international law. It pertains to a person who is born of parents, both of whom are U.S. citizens. It does not primarily have anything to do with place of birth, but of parental nationality. The object is to remove any foreign allegiances or obligations from one's birth circumstances.
As a partial illustration of this point, my cousin was born of a mother (my aunt) who was a U.S. citizen and a father who was a French citizen, in France. She therefore inherited U.S. citizenship from her mother (no requirement to be born in the U.S.) and birthright French citizenship. She would not be able to run for president, but it does show that even partial citizen parentage endows citizenship.
So, I beat you in relevant degrees 3 to 1. You can say what you want, but you would still be wrong.
An "amateur ether physics enthusiast"? It sounds like you don't know any of the physics that were not omitted. You invoke ideas about the Michaelson-Morely experiment that are not substantiated. Why don't you swim with the pros at the Journal of Galilean Electrodynamics, where ideas like this are fleshed out with pure physics analysis? I'm no friend of Einsteinian Relativity, but it's going to take more than "enthusiasm" to provide a replacement theory. My own view is that we need to reconsider what we define as the "speed" of light, since a photon, in its own "reference frame" takes no time at all to go from one place to another, being in both places at the same time. This poses a problem in defining cause and effect.
So, you can be an amateur enthusiast declaring a triple-degreed engineer to not know physics---and on the basis of your ignorance you declare me a "faggot shill." I don't think so. Your further comments on weather control are no more than fancies.
Making the wrong investments always ruins your life...but it is not the fault of the investment, or of the mechanisms that allow investments. I wouldn't have been able to afford a house or automobiles if I couldn't have spread the debt over time. The problems you cite are the problems of government lying to the people and enmeshing them in bad investments. If someone pushes bad literature on you, should we banish printing presses? That seems to be your logic.
I have three degrees in aeronautics and astronautics, including fluid physics, atmospheric physics, and applied physics. I have actually worked on the problem. The physics works, as demonstrated repeatedly by products that rely on them (e.g., aircraft, missiles, radar, lasers, launch vehicles, satellites).
Since I have apparently more understanding of physics than your screed would suggest, I don't think you win this argument.
Exactly. Loan interest is the inducement a prospective borrower makes to the one from whom he wishes to obtain a loan. Terms can be negotiated as to style of interest and period of repayment. Why blame "usury" for the desire to have money? The borrower wants money he didn't earn. Why can't the loaner also have money earned by the use of his money? You can't have a free economy without freedom to make mutually agreeable financial arrangements.
You don't understand logic. It is not true that all statements are equally possible and that therefore the onus of proof is on the doubter. The onus of proof is always on the person alleging a statement to be true. If you allege zebras exist, then it is on you to provide the doubter with evidence. Likewise, if he alleges leprechauns exist, the onus is not on you to prove they don't exist.
In no way does logic dictate that it is possible to "control" the weather (by which I mean something orders of magnitude more significant than squeezing a little water out of a cloud by seeding). It is a matter of physics. I have had occasion to run the numbers on what it would take to clear an airport runway of incoming fog by evaporating the droplets with an infrared laser. Seems possible, right? Totally wrong. The power requirement is enormous. And that's just fog.
You see, physics is the tangible embodiment of logic. If something is not physically true, then it cannot logically be true. All this reference to HAARP is not based in physics at all, but in superstition. Basically, no one understands it, and they use that lack of understanding to justify the accusation of magical powers. It is like witchcraft. I hate to see people falling back into the Dark Ages.
And I was courteous and civil to you at the outset, which you rewarded with a comparison to a preacher uncle who "used to give me these kind of circular logic answers, always ending with 'You just have to have Faith'." And then you bring up "so many cliches" in connection with our conversation, but try to run away by saying "not condemning you, personally." So I asked you not to paint me with that brush, even by association. You take that as offense. I'm in no hurry...and I am not "whining" and "railing," which is simply a self-serving exaggeration.
I pointed out that I did not use catchphrases and you translate that into an attack.
If you are a "fucking Marine" you may not scare easily, but you sure get your hackles up with any perceived slight to your manhood. When in doubt, shoot first, ask questions later? I'm not sure I would assign you to lead point.
In my experience, the more belligerent the response, the more talk is cheap.
I notice that you have entirely dropped the subject of our conversation, and have moved on to personal criticism. This also tells me that you have run out of argument.
Well, there was that time when they were ruled by Austria. (Remember the legend of William Tell?) But the criminal migrants are probably put off by the need to be fluent in 3 languages in order to have any mobility.
Robert Burns: "The best laid schemes o' mice an' men, gang aft a-gley."
Or, in modern idiom: "The best-laid plans of rats and bats often go sideways."
I so agree. They are no more than purveyors of world government. As I understand, Switzerland has never been a member, and they are doing fine.
Big if. Somehow that was no impediment to our forebears. But a socialist utopia will never come to pass, and that is a blessing. You will notice that the problems of education are not addressed by the prophecy. That which is overlooked will contain the seeds of our eventual destruction.
I have no interest in getting into a prolonged, worthless argument, so I will just let that stand as is. There is a lot of paranoia and magical thinking that attends these pages.
Dead Sea Scrolls: You ask the people who dated them. They are consistent with other copies of the Old Testament. The point is, they were written before the Council of Nicea even met. And there is no evidence that the Council ever re-wrote any of the books of the Bible.
The Apocrypha are not part of the New Testament. It is the New Testament that seals the meaning of Christianity. What difference does it make to you whether they are canon or not? You are not prevented from reading and believing them.
I'm not your uncle. I'm not a cliche person. Kindly do not paint me with that brush.
I haven't used any catchphrases and you have only diddled around a matter of fact.
Your belief in the corruption of the Bible is as inexplicable than your uncle's faith.
Not credible. The Dead Sea Scrolls were written well before the Council of Nicea, and have been available as a reference for the Old Testament books. The Apocrypha are generally available, but not accepted as canon. The definitive doctrine of the Christian church was sealed in the New Testament.
What is not mentioned is that recognition and admission of the truth is absolutely essential to the restoration of sanity among the general public. This war of the competing Narratives must be settled by Full Disclosure. And I will expect it will upset some of the denizens in these pages as well, by dispelling favored conceptions. We will be braced for what will shock "the normies." But don't think there won't be shocks for us, as well.
There first has to be a decision as to whether any kind of "central" intelligence agency is needed. The original justification was to coordinate and synthesize intelligence from other agencies: military, diplomatic, earth sciences. If not, eliminate the CIA. But if so, determine its necessary functions and properties.
Then take charge of the CIA and declare there will be CIA1 and CIA2, with the present CIA being CIA1 and CIA2 being at present unpopulated. Then start hiring for CIA2, allowing CIA1 staff to apply. Pick whoever passes muster. Progressively start transferring portfolios from CIA1 to CIA2. When all portfolios are transferred, and CIA1 has no more function, and all the allowable transfers have taken place, declare CIA1 to be superfluous to requirements and slated for decommissioning. The staff have the option of applying to other agencies or taking early retirement. It might be effective to give the CIA2 a different name to fully establish the transformation. There should, of course, be physical and administrative firewalls between CIA1 and CIA2 during this process. (Trust me, any CIA personnel should adapt to this environment easily. It is no different than handling compartmented material.)
Some might advise removing such a CIA2 to another facility, but that's a hard call. The existing facility at Langley probably represents a significant investment in infrastructure and data hardcopy / digital copy and might logically be retained.