exchemist

You may be right but then why drag Europe into the logic? And why this talk of making Europe pay for it? Just seen a headline saying the CIA director has stated Hegseth was not drunk when he ordered the airstrikes. This gets funnier and funnier. 🐐🎪

Slightly tangentially to the above, I remain a bit puzzled why Vance was getting so hot under the collar at the thought the USA was fighting Europe's war for them with these attacks on the Houthis. I gather there was even discussion about making Europe pay for the operation. But so far as I am aware, there is no suggestion that anyone in Europe asked for these attacks to be carried out. On the contrary, it seems to have been entirely an American initiative - possibly as a way to signal (haha) willingness to fight a proxy war with Iran. So on what basis would Europe pay for an action they never requested and which might actually blow back to hurt their interests? I can't follow the logic. Is there some background to this that I am missing, or is it just the fascist vein in Vance's neck throbbing again?

Goldberg has published the transcript in The Atlantic, hahaha. They had it coming, after trying to trash the guy. Watch them wriggle😁.

You may be overthinking this a bit. I sympathise, but that's what "flooding the zone with shit" is intended to do to people, so that they have no idea what to make of anything and give up trying to follow it all. The Kremlin does this. I think it went like this. Consider: this bunch of goons has the mindset that all the systems and procedures they have inherited are the cumbersome, bureaucratic and needlessly costly products of a bloated civil service. Consequently, seeing themselves as breath-of-fresh-air iconoclasts, I suspect they thought this is all balls, there are perfectly good commercial encrypted messaging services, so why bother with rules that say we have to use this state-developed[boo hiss] secret squirrel system, we'll just use Signal from now on. And so they did........ BOOM!! 😁 I was very much amused by Waltz preposterously suggesting that Goldberg had deliberately got his phone number into Waltz's address book (how?) and saying he would have to "consult Elon" about how to stop this happening again. What cock! The solution is, er.............to use the special secure system that already exists and whose use is, er, in fact mandated by the current regulations they saw fit to ignore. Waltz's performance put me in mind of particularly unconvincing schoolboy with the feeblest of "dog ate my homework" excuses. Mind you, I think Goldberg might want to make sure his tax affairs are in good shape and that he doesn't get so much as a speeding fine for the next few months. These people now control everything and are extremely vindictive, with the object of scaring everyone into not probing what they are up to.

Well it's obvious. This administration has good connections with Putin and happily repeats all the Kremlin's talking points. Furthermore the administration is extremely hostile to Europe, so the US and Russia have a common enemy.

But the Russians are now the allies of the US, so why does this matter?

No, he is forcing his "view", on many things that did not feature in his election campaign, on the citizens, by order. There are laws that prevent Trump doing some of the things he has ordered to be done. But he is ignoring them. I have told you this.

Now you are changing your ground. You said he was expressing a view, when he was issuing an order. So you were presenting it as a free speech issue, when it was nothing of the kind. Now, you are claiming he has a mandate from the people to issue these orders, which is an entirely different matter. On that question, in many of the orders he does not have that mandate, since he is exceeding the power of the president under the constitution. He was elected under the constitution, which designates separate and independent powers for the president, Congress and the judiciary. Some ofTrump’s orders usurp the power of Congress and others usurp the power of the courts. Trump is destroying the constitution and replacing it with a dictatorship. If you know any history you will see that what is going on is a classic “soft coup”, whereby after being elected, the ruler dismantles the constitutional checks on his power and rules by diktat, reinforced by fear. To change the constitution in accordance with the constitution, one needs a 2/3 majority of Congress. Trump is ignoring all that, just issuing orders and daring anyone to stand in his way. It’s a fascist coup.

This about Trump is pretty silly of you because he is not just “expressing his view”.He is issuing executive orders that force people to do, or to stop doing, certain things.

P R O P O R T I O N A L I T Y

What an extraordinary example of lazy false equivalence. The principle of proportionality is well-established in both domestic and international law and was quite clearly adhered to in the case illustrated in your picture.

…produced naturally?

👍

Sara e, you might want to check the dates on some of these threads you are responding to This one is 8 months old.🙂

Ancient History and Archaeology. He takes after my father, not me or my wife (who was a mathematical engineer).

It's all described in the text. The note defines the 3 frequencies and the text explains how they were combined. The relevant section starts "To entangle the two drums, we irradiate the cavity with two pulses simultaneously......"

Some may have a different view from me. But looking at similarly highly educated parents, for example at my son's school, I felt a lot of them were constantly worrying, whether it was about academic results, or physical aptitudes, or psychological things and trying to micromanage how their children developed - and that a lot of it was quite outside their control because the child is who he or she is anyway! (I'm the eldest of five and my mother was a teacher, so I'm used to a fairly robust attitude to these things.) Some people have books and books on child-rearing. We had a couple (I was given a very amusing one for dads, written by the publishers of a well-known UK brand of car maintenance manuals: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Baby-Manual-Conception-Haynes-Workshop/dp/1844257592 ) So my kneejerk reaction was: "What? Not yet another dimension of things to worry about, pointlessly!" I'm going to Scotland to see him tomorrow - his final term at university. I can hardly believe it.🙂

Well I just gave my personal opinion as a parent. There is already so much one can worry about with a child. My experience has been that most of the things one frets over resolve themselves. It is all too easy to overthink parenthood and thereby diminish the pleasure. Children should be allowed to be unique individuals without parents worrying about where in the genes some feature, or facet of behaviour, may come from. They are not laboratory rats. If there is really something wrong with your child you will know and can seek professional advice at that point. What was it James Bond said? “Anxiety is a dividend paid to disaster before it is due.” Personally, I would not volunteer for another source of anxiety. But others may feel differently.

Details are given in the paper. See notes to Fig 1. which define fc, fm1 and fm2. The system is simultaneously irradiated with 2 frequencies: fc+ fm1 and fc- fm2. I'm unclear why you could not see this.

No, we think he is a dangerous fascist, one of many in Trump's administration with contempt for democracy, who is working night and day to destroy it and replace it with one party rule. That's a tad more serious than treating workers poorly. This DOGE campaign is a "terror", intended to terrify everybody working in government so that they keep quiet and do the will of Trump and his acolytes, regardless of wisdom or legality. DOGE is also physically shutting down - by armed assault - agencies that have nothing to do with the government, without any legal authority. This is getting increasingly like Hitler's Brownshirts. Musk also interferes in the politics of other countries, spreading lies and supporting neo-Nazi groups and individuals.

If you want a reply you need to post the relevant text here. It's one of the forum rules that readers should not have to good off-site to open files from unknown sources. Is this an extract from an online journal? If so you could post a link to that.

Yes, monarchies, e.g. the English- and later British - monarchy, can be very stable indeed. But then they have a high degree of succession planning that is accepted by the people they rule, which avoids a power vacuum when the monarch dies. And they have also made concessions over the years to give the people a say, in order to retain acceptance of the system. In fact, the English and Spanish monarchies were actually reinstated by popular demand after experiments with a republic, which in both cases had led to autocracy (Cromwell and Franco).

Agreed. It seems impossible to draw firm conclusions from attempting to correlate the presumed style of government with military success or long term stability. But what does seem to be the case is that territorial expansion reliant on a single autocrat often does not create a stable entity.

That empire, built up by Cyrus from 550BC seems to have lasted about 200 years. It was ruled by a succession of kings. It notably failed to retain Greece (cf. battle of Salamis, in which the Persians were defeated by democratic Athens) - and was eventually taken over by Alexander the Great.

Oh yes, this is because he knows he's radioactive, so distancing himself from Poilievre will help the latter's chances.