rangerx

2 hours ago, naitche said:

The shame of it for the left is the idea that if you are not with us, you must be against us. Dissent with some aspects of  policy on the left  sees people shut out and silenced, denied any space there.

There are really only 2 choices. Having good intention doesn't exonerate bad outcomes.

A persons choice of which side to support, if a choice must be made, is subjective.  I think its a huge mistake for Left thinking people to assume its objective. That the mass of humanity supporting the opposition in elections are supporting a similarly singular ideology as a fixed identity.

 

It's not exclusive to the left, as you put it.

However, when rhetoric and lies come from leaders there's no hiding behind it. The right voted for Trump. He is the example that has been set and the lead which is followed.

If anyone voted for him, they are responsible for him.

Republicans went on ad nauseam  for decades about personal responsibility, but run like rats from the sinking ship when it comes to taking responsibility for Trump.

35 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Obama and Clinton were each President for 8yrs and no one went on murder sprees citing them as inspiration.

I recall Republicans losing their minds because Obama went a church service to listen to Jeremiah Wright and how he was "palling around with terrorists" for associating with Bill Ayres, even though he was a child at the time and once attended a charity fundraiser later in life.

In Trump's statement to New Zealand, he mentioned people dying, but never mentioned by who and why. A white nationalist terrorist who espoused the Trump doctrine.

The denial and hypocrisy is off the charts.

2 hours ago, MigL said:

The nature of the two crashes seems to point to an unrequested downward pitch shortly after take-off.
All airliners are naturally stable ( as opposed to some unstable military aircraft ), so there should be very little reason to re-write control laws for a modified, or even new, aircraft.
Unless mistakes were made in the coding.

I've been struggling with this one too. Two accidents with similar black box parameters, coupled with several complaints on file raises red flags. Compelling as that is, it's still inconclusive, after all investigations take several months, if not years to eliminate other possibilities.

There are numerous other problems with aircraft that don't cause grounding. Landing gear failure, for example. It occurs a lot, yet they don't ground planes for it. Instead, they developed a workaround procedure. Run away trim, loss of cable or hydraulic surface controls or unidentified metal fatigue in engines also crash a lot of planes in the absence of pilot error. In a stall warning, instead of adding power it's often better to disengage the autopilot and push the nose down to regain speed.

The thing is with the Max 8, the crashes occur shortly after takeoff, when the aircraft has the least amount of energy to to perform alternative maneuvers.

For that reason and in the interest of public safety, it's best to ground the aircraft, whether or not it's the exact known cause.

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

But difference between animals and plants, and homosexual humans, is such that 100% homosexual people usually have no children, so can't spread their genes

As mentioned earlier, some late bloomers (for lack of a better term) may have lived otherwise heterosexual lives, with offspring.

Would that suggest spontaneous onset or would it be thrown back to an otherwise recessive factor?

38 minutes ago, MigL said:

AFAIK there is no gay gene, but I'm far from an expert on the matter, so there could be various gene combinations which result in homosexuality.
Other factors which affect us are hormonal/enzyme changes while in the womb, and environment/upbringing.

It could depend on any of these factors, or combinations thereof.

Sexual dimorphism is the condition where the two sexes of the same species exhibit different characteristics beyond the differences in their sexual organs. The condition occurs in many animals and some plants. Differences may include secondary sex characteristics, size, weight, color, markings, and may also include behavioral and cognitive differences.

Several species marine invertebrates and fishes change sexes in their lifetimes. Although some species exhibit sequential hermaphroditism, it's not necessarily observed observed in humans (no less homosexual humans), but that's not to say there isn't at least some factor(s) which affect behavior. For example, some would attest being gay since birth, while others may discover it later in life, subsequent to an otherwise heterosexual lifestyle.

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

I read a paper on someone supposedly finding a "gay" gene which was referenced by numerous politicians, etc. However, it didn't pass peer review for reasons I forget. Something to do with confirmation bias, not so much actually proving it to be a gay gene. As for genetic structures, that's yet to be proven/disproven.

It was cooked up by homophobes, particularly one's "of faith"

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/queer-notions-how-christian-homophobes-misuse-my-gay-gene-report/

Here's a spoof on the topic.

 

12 minutes ago, studiot said:

How is power that limited in normal flight?

How many aircraft fly underwater?

 

Sorry for the nits, it's good to know that such a system is coming one day.

My point was with regard to black box technology following crashes.

As for persistent in-flight technology, ACARS is the best we have for now, because the satellite constellation is incomplete. Likewise, ACARS only relays some directional and configuration parameters but not everything, no less voice streams.

I suppose some military aircraft, including Air Force One remain in  contact with terrestrial stations, but undoubtedly at a high cost.

Commercial airliners need to compete and passengers tend to look for bargains rather than premiums.  You get what you pay for.

 

Currently, there is a system for relaying aircraft data at regular intervals. ACARS

I think one of the problems is power. It is finite. At least for now, it's more efficient to use limited power to locate the device than to gather the data/voice streams.

Another problem is under water, where carriage of RF signals is poor. This why they use a ping device, which employs sound signals, not radio frequencies.

Ships have been using EPIRB and aircraft have been using  ELT for decades which is a RF signal gathered by satellites, but again due to power constraints is limited to location, not configuration, flight path data or voice communications.

However, I do see the potential for the OP once a global wireless system is developed that operates efficiently from any point on the planet.

On 3/11/2019 at 9:18 AM, Ten oz said:

DHS spending has already increased by nearly 15 billion dollars under Trump. Via the national emergency declaration Trump is demanding another roughly 6 billion and then his 2020 budget includes another 8 billion. 

The increases we have already had, the national emergency, and now the additional budget requests all add up to around 30 billion dollars. 

Which begs the question... why?

Between March and July of last year, $1.2 billion had been earmarked to the Army Corps of Engineers for surveys, construction, land acquisition, and program management. By year's end, the Corps had a little less than $700 million under contract for construction of new and replacement wall system in the Rio Grande Valley, Tucson, Yuma, El Centro and San Diego sectors. An additional $300 million or so was ready to award when the government reopened after the shutdown. Those bids are yet to be closed and there remains a surplus of over $200 million.

As far as actual checks being cut, those amount to a mere 6% of that budget. The ACoE is still in the planning stages and tendering contracts. They haven't even begun the survey portion, no less eminent domain and legal issues, environmental and other regulations and actual construction.

So $30 billion is little more than a number thrown out to piss down a hole to buy votes for 2020.

 

21 minutes ago, MigL said:

A few hours ago a thread was closed because " we should not discuss any topic about to make explosives".
( Can I make explosives with my own pee ? )

Seems a bit like 'closing the barn door after the horse is gone'.
You can watch a 1967 episode of StarTrek TOS. to find out how to make gunpowder.
( and if you can find a 4 inch bamboo shoot, and a fist sized diamond, you can make a mortar, and kill a Gorn )
You can find a multitude of sites on the 'interwebs' disseminating such information.
And even elementary ( high school level ) textbooks, available at any public library, will give you that information.

If we are primarily a discussion/teaching site, should we be providing safe handling information to people who can get the know-how from other readily available sources, but who may well injure themselves ( and others ), because they are not aware of the dangers ?

There are laws governing the manufacture and usage of explosives. Since 9/11 and the Patriot Act, any discussion of explosives by laypersons is a red flag.

I'm certain the owners of this board would rather avoid all of that. Even from a safety/regulatory standpoint, there nothing to be learned here that can't be learned elsewhere through proper channels.

1 hour ago, QuantumT said:

To be depressed is to have your head so far up you own ass, that you can't see nothing but shit, and feel nothing but pain.

Depression is most often a symptom of an otherwise greater condition, like bi-polarity, schizophrenia, OCD etc. A psychosomatic disorder is a disease which involves both mind and body. Some physical diseases are made worse by mental factors such as stress and anxiety.

Mental illness isn't something that goes away at the snap of a finger. It requires a thorough diagnosis, adequate medication and compassionate support. A minority of cases are treated by lifestyle changes, but the assertion everyone ought to be shamed, is shameful.

It's a "tragedy of the commons" when issues are taken to nth degree for self interest, as opposed to the public interest at large.

The right went on for decades about so-called liberal media. Rather than balance it,  instead took it to the extreme.

That's a fail and an ironic one at that.

13 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

In my opinion the fact Trump wasn't already in prison for his many previous frauds over the decades speaks to how unequal justice is in the United States

Yeah, it's a whack-a-mole process trying to keep up with it. Despite all of the allegations against him, it's shirked regularly by a new issue d'jour it seems.

You'd think with all that's known about him, he'd back away or show some introspect, but no. It's bad enough his former attorney implicated him in fourteen crimes, yet the news cycles are newly preoccupied by the free pass he gave Kim Jong Un on nuclear armaments and human rights violations. Then of course, there's nepotism too. Having influence peddled Jared's security clearance subsequent to having previous denials for doing so.

Legal, constitution or administrative, there's just no bottom to Trump's pit of transgressions. The saddest part being, his base is totally fine with that. All the while wrongfully accusing long since ousted liberals of phony crimes, bogus constitutional illegality and imperialism. Trump and his base have effectively nullified their often recited standards of family values, personal responsibility, dignity of office and rule of law. What's worse. Trump is a rino, but at the opposite extreme. A privileged white New York liberal turncoat con man. To that end, I say good riddance. He's ended up where he belongs, on the wrong side of history with a party that deserved him.

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

It is all still experience though. He has been around the court system long enough to know some of the basics. 

Indeed, knowing it intimidates those who aren't so savvy or resourceful. However, in recent times I suspect he's grossly underestimating those who are bringing actions against him, namely the state AG's and special counsel as though the court of public opinion or poor preparation will let him off the hook.

His response to Cohen's testimony is interesting. I would have expected him to bad mouth Cohen at every turn, but because he didn't actually implicate Trump with collusion, he embraced it as favorable to his case. The thing is, collusion isn't necessary a crime, insomuch as unauthorized foreign agency and conspiracy against the USA are. Especially given that's the book they threw at Paul Manafort. Trump is so hung up on the collusion point (because it's public opinion), he's neglected the more serious side of reality.

12 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Between federal and state courts Trump has been involved in 3,500 legal cases. It makes sense he would have some basic knowledge of how to shield himself. Considering his history I am shocked that he is as amateurish as he is. 

A lot of those cases were thrown out as frivolous bully tactics. Most of them died on the vine while the remainder were settled on the courthouse steps.

Several others were contract breaches, raised knowingly for a reduction in costs by getting contractors over a barrel, especially if meant rabbit holes or breaking backs.

Numerous others were tax inconsistencies, Chapter 11's, securities violations and civil rights issues. Nonetheless most of these were stirred by greed, underhandedness or outright failure as opposed to justice and fairness.

Some are sexual in nature. A sexual assault claim from 1994 for child rape was filed against Trump on October 14, 2016, a case that was dropped and refiled, remaining in suspension as of November 4, 2016. Even his divorce from former wife Ivana was granted on her grounds "cruel and inhuman treatment"

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

The real "new" thing was his mention that the Southern District of New York is actively investigating Trump on other matters about which Cohen could not speak. That was new(s). 

Even though he couldn't specify details, the list is quite long. Insurance fraud, tax fraud, misappropriation of funds, misrepresentation, unauthorized foreign agency and breach of trust, to name a few allegations.

That's not to mention Don Jr. or Jared Kushner either. They've raised a few eyebrows too.  Don Jr. isn't bright enough to dodge bullets, but I doubt Jared won't roll over if he's implicated in all this. Albeit long after the fact.

Ivanka, I'm not so sure. I doubt there's much at her behest. If anything she's complicit by her silence, as blood being thicker than water. I think Melania found herself in a situation she didn't sign up for. I don't feel sorry for her, though. She ought to know better and is trapped in a unhappy marriage, lest she gives up her lavish lifestyle or hold outs for inheritances. She's going to make a killing when she writes her tell all book after Donny's dead and gone. But that's a whole other story.

7 hours ago, zapatos said:

Did he change your mind about anything?

That's a good question. I suppose the short answer is no. Even given the sheer volume, none of the allegations Cohen leveled towards Trump surprised me, nor did the responses from the likes of Jim Jordan. He's clearly not interested justice, insomuch as looking the other way about Trump, while upholding the persecution of Hillary Clinton. He invoked her name a few times in that vain, including lying about the source of the Steele dossier. Other republicans eschewed their own committee as starting out their term as though it was little more than a liberal conspiracy, by inquiring witness testimony from "the criminal" Cohen. Clearly not true. It's the third inquiry by the committee. Not once, did any republican bring up or discuss exculpatory evidence insomuch as going on the attack.

Mark Meadows using a black woman as a prop and his triggered outrage for being called out for it was disgusting. Other than a token black or an attractive woman, I don't think anyone needs a ton of bricks to fall on their heads, that Trump is not an equal opportunity employer.

The word was never used, but Cohen openly admitted to corruption and alluded to the quasi tacit manner which Trump enables it. The whole "do I have your loyalty?" thing. He stipulated to the level of Trump's micromanagement across the board. Something Trump denies doing when it comes to criticizing other republicans for wrongdoing. In fact the whole republican position is that of Trump being naive to all of it. All that does is define Trump as a fool, a Putin asset.  A Manchurian candidate, if you will. A useful idiot. The classic example of biting off one's nose to spite their face. There's no depth too low to stoop to own the libs, it seems. That doesn't bode well for conservatives in general, no less the country as a whole.

Attacking Cohen as not credible undermined the country's ability to prosecute organized crime. Turning states evidence has been a tool for the justice department since time immemorial.

Isn't that what Rudy Juliani did to clean up gangland activity in NY?

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Some of his statements sounded like he was trumpeting the Democrat horn in a way that added nothing new. I actually not just wondered about that (or getting parole early), or even still working for Trump...the rational being that he could be hiding stuff he knows while seeming to be saying everything possible against him. "see how much I hate Trump, I must be singing everything I know", when in fact he is only singing what is known that he knows.

Cohen was hamstrung on some points by ongoing investigations. That's not a Democrat thing, it's a jurisprudence thing. He admitted that co-operating with those, he stands eligible for early parole after two thirds of his sentence is served. That's not exclusive to Cohen, in fact unless stated by a judge at the time of sentencing, it's available to anyone convicted and incarcerated for crime.

The truth shall set you free, as the old saying goes.

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Did he say anything else that is actually legally damning to Trump?

Cohen revealed that co-conspirator number one is indeed Donald Trump. Number two being Don Jr.. Cohen was convicted of campaign finance fraud for the money paid to the two girls. Trump signed the check and conspired to cover it up. Like Watergate, which was little more than a third rate burglary, it was the conspiracy around it that implicated Nixon. The same standard can be applied to Trump.

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I hadn't heard the portrait thing before...which essentially I think was theft of money he himself anonymously donated. Was that already known?

No, it wasn't his money. It was money donated by others to his namesake foundation which is under investigation by the NY AG's office. It's actually two cases of fraud. One for misusing funds from the charity itself AND unlawfully soliciting funds from the auction at his resort at Mar a Lago to cover the other.

29 minutes ago, iNow said:

Everyone had their mind made up before he even spoke. So, what should we speak about here?

I thought his testimony was compelling. He was self-deprecating and contrite. While some might view it as play acting or crocodile tears, but I think Mueller had him dead to rights.

The reason I say that is because Mueller has not felt the need to interview Trump in person, That tells me he already has hard evidence. I suspect he has the phone records and possibly voice files of the Roger Stone call to Wikileaks and subsequent call to Don Jr. Undoubtedly, Mueller has financial and tax records.

Cohen is facing three years in a penitentiary for lying to Congress and Mueller (among other things). It makes no sense, that he would go back to Congress and lie more, lest he sets himself for an increased sentence. Besides that, if he were lying, you'd think he would be more damning of Trump. Instead, he gave the appearance of some uncertainties, suspicions and opinions. That's not the sort of thing a liar or someone who was coached would do.

The checks signed by Trump himself and Don Jr. are really incriminating.  Not just because of the lies, but because of the ongoing business relationship between POTUS, his companies and his campaign. Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations and was subsequently convicted.

The hush money to the two girls came to light. He testified being a patsy to Trump, going out on a limb to withdraw the funds from his own line of credit which raised a red flag with the bank and law enforcement.

Cohen also alluded to what we already know, that Trump's MO is to stiff his contractors, irrespective of their performance. Likewise to inflate values of properties to obtain loans or to deflate property values to dodge taxes.

He testified to Trump using a shill to buy a portrait of himself for a high value, then reimbursing them from a charity. Misappropriating funds for egotistical purposes is reprehensible, no less fraudulent.

Not to mention obstruction of justice, but the Yates/Comey firings didn't have much to do with Cohen although they may have discussed it.

 

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

It won't hurt them with Democrats. 

That's because democrats deal with it and move on. Unlike republicans who double down and conflate it into something it's not.

2 hours ago, MigL said:

You gotta love this...
Two Canadians and one American discussing what to do about the dangerous political climate in the US

As Canadians, despite our personal politics we're pretty much on the same page when it comes to gun laws, abortion, health care and climate change.

In America, the rhetoric around those wedge issues are exploited as socialism, anti-intellectualism or racism.

Churchill said it best. "We can always count on America to do the right thing after exhausting all other possibilities."
 

5 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Well one is a start, but I don't think it will get far on it's own.

That reads like others have no interest in personal responsibility, concession or solutions. Feudalism or tribalism can't be shamed into changing. It requires introspect and acceptance.

When intolerance is ingrained deeper than resolution, society as a whole is the loser. Given the current level of intransigence, it can never get better, it can only get worse. Other than capitulation to dictatorship, civil war is the inevitable result. One extreme or the other. That's the path America is on.

1 minute ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I don't think you will get everyone to agree on exactly what this should mean, never mind agree or make the personal decision to uphold it.

Isn't personal responsibility something conservatives preached ad nauseam for eons?

Besides that, the ball isn't in one's court to have other's re-educated, it's only incumbent upon one's self to do better, as opposed to exacerbating it.
 

8 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

How would you propose this be brought about?

By actually taking personal responsibility for it, instead of passing the buck by hiding behind freedom of speech, doubling down, shifting blame or deflection.

40 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

So what would you suggest be done to avoid it?

By changing the way threats are framed. For example, demanding billions of dollars on marginally effective walls to protect against perceived threats of terror by racial entities, while downplaying domestic terror directed at political adversaries as lone wolf. In recent times, Americans killed more Americans in terror attacks than other entities. To follow suit on the meme "radical Islamic terror", it would be fair to say more Americans die because of "radical Christian terror" but it's not. The left does not paint entire groups with a wide brush in the same manner as the right does. The rehashed meme "socialist" is rearing it's ugly head again and it's not to counter the left framing the right as fascist, insomuch as deliberate propaganda to instill fear.

Or by removing the "fake news" or "enemy of the people" labels simply because one cannot refute the facts reported to them. Those kind of retorts are ball bearings and crazy carpets on the slippery slope to tyranny.

It may not be immediately apparent with plants themselves, but insects that attack plants are already a cause for epidemics by range expansion.

For example, the Mountain Pine Beetle.

https://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/gtr/gtr-nrs-p-36papers/47regniere-p-36.pdf

4 hours ago, Ten oz said:

As previously mentioned I suspect the speculation that Mueller was finished was just Barr's opening move to place pressure on Mueller. Barr can't fire Mueller outright or stop the investigation less he wants to spend the next several years embroiled in obstruction of justice charges. Signalling to the press that things are wrapping up was a good opening play. It gets people moving towards the exists and creates an sense that things are taking too long and/or that Mueller is dragging his feet.

I was suspicious of Barr when the announcement came out as well. It was out there for little more than a day when the Mueller team indicated it had unfinished business.

That tells me the report is multifaceted and deeply complex.

Let's not forget that Barr is a Trump appointee and Mueller is a career Republican. I wouldn't hold my breath expecting either to do the right thing.

For now and at the very least, Mueller is worthy of the benefit of the doubt.

I've said it before an I will say it again. Like Nixon and Watergate, it's ultimately up to the Republicans to sort their own out.

Color me skeptical.