Venandi

Stop hysterically waving your hands around and maybe we'll be able to tell.

Not quite... it's sorta how the military threatens (and disciplines) serving officers who express their own professional opinions publicly. Sure is a lot of that going around eh? "Armed with knowledge, wisdom we seek."

Here's the same chart with the percentage of the population over 70 added: COVID Vaccination Rates, Death Rates per 100,000 Population, and Percentage of Population Over 70 COUNTRY VACCINATION RATE (% OF POPULATION) DEATHS PER 100,000 % POPULATION OVER 70 Uganda 0.03% 88 2.3% Niger 12% 5 3.1% Burundi 1% 15 3.0% North Korea 0% 0 1.0% Eritrea 0.1% 5 2.5% Canada 83% 37 19.1% United States 75% 269 16.5% United Kingdom 85% 226 18.5% Germany 82% 186 21.0% France 81% 187 20.0% Italy 84% 210 22.9% Spain 90% 223 19.3%

Yes, there's a downside to being dense alright, especially if you're too dense to quantify the level of density. Personally, I'm not too sure what to make of all this... as a result, I take some comfort in the African proverb which suggests it's better to trust someone who is actively searching for the truth than someone who says they've already found it. It might be more complicated than atmospheric or cerebral density would lead a person to think. COVID Vaccination Rates and Death Rates per 100,000 Population COUNTRY VACCINATION RATE (% OF POPULATION) DEATHS PER 100,000 Uganda 0.03% 88 Niger 12% 5 Burundi 1% 15 North Korea 0% 0 Eritrea 0.1% 5 Canada 83% 37 United States 75% 269 United Kingdom 85% 226 Germany 82% 186 France 81% 187 Italy 84% 210 Spain 90% 223

Sad, guess I didn't see the poll you refer to; even as cynical as I am I wouldn't have guessed it was that high. Thanks for the link but I stopped reading after a few paragraphs... out of embarrassment. What a shameful chapter in the history of a great nation. Unless I need it for gym motivation, I can't even bring myself to read the comments (right here on the forum) from past threads on the subject. BTW, thanks for all of your work on the "trickle thread," I wasn't smart enough to retain it all but I did read it with interest. I'll save that the link for the next time I feel like watching NETFLIX instead of training.

Not ridiculous at all... If memory serves it was running at about 18%. You may have forgotten just how nasty and hateful people became. Imagine cheering when your neighbours got fired. Some of the rhetoric around that was "try and pay your mortgage now." Remember that... I sure as hell do. Those opinions are now in the same box as all of those "elbows Up" T-shirts that polluted the gym a while ago. Not a trace of em now... In fact, if you to go searching for some of that hateful rhetoric you'll be hard pressed to find any... national shame perhaps. And well deserved IMO --------------- Actually here ya go, I guess it was 15%... this is a quick AI breakdown. Beyond that you'll have to do your own homework as I don't recall the actual poll and I'm not going searching for a link: ASPECT PERCENTAGE Support for internment 15% Support for restrictions 79% Strongly against any measure 15%

Well, I would caution against the notion that China has changed, Canada has changed, or that acting on something which was (only months ago) deemed a security threat to the nation has been voided simply because of Trump's antics. I would also observe that keeping enemies close leads to unnecessary stress and serves to increase the potential for conflict (in many areas) when evolving circumstances result in reliance on the provision of fundamental necessities. It only encourages bad behaviour on the part of bad actors who see the new relationship as a tool to be exploited and view it as an affiliation born of desperation... something to be seized upon when convenient to do so. There is an African proverb that suggests "If the rabbit becomes your enemy, admit that that he is a fast sprinter".

Entire states have been doing that by deliberately setting aside federal immigration laws under sanctuary state / city status. Jurisdictions like San Fransisco, LA and New York made a big show of refusing to cooperate with ICE attempts to deport the same hardened criminals you now suggest nobody actually wants to protect. In the fullness of time, I'm wondering if you will oppose the sanctuary concept if/when it's applied (in equal and opposite measure) to a federal law you stand fully in support of. The point being, whether you agree with a federal law or not, it raises a pretty basic question (at least for me).... how do you govern a country when federal laws, enacted under federal authority, are ignored by state and municipal jurisdictions? Imagine the same thing on a similar scale applying to something you actually support, gun control measures are a possible example... would the large scale enactment of 2nd amendment sanctuary jurisdictions designed to thwart future federal firearm regulations be OK with you? Would violent attacks on ATF agents trying to arrest the owners of illegal firearms be OK too?

I usually skim through these threads because I claim no particular expertise in such matters. But, even lacking a modicum of expertise, your blanket assertion caught my attention in a way usually reserved for a 2X4 across the side of the head... as did the notion that Canada's self inflicted mutilation of the industry itself could now be turned into a argument in support of non viability. It's a fascinating exercise in logical absurdity that's on par with the liberal gun grab. I say that because there has to be an alternate explanation and there has to be a motive for using it... otherwise your statement simply makes no sense on the face of it. Would you consider the oil industry in Iraq, Kuwait or the UAE (ever been to Dubai) to be viable? I ask because the thing those countries all have in common is less reserves than Canada. IMO, deliberately strangling something valuable with both hands and then claiming it to be non viable due to asphyxiation seems like a uniquely progressive position. In a logical world, eating all of the chickens shouldn't be used to assert that declining egg production is proof that egg farming can't be considered a viable industry.

So is searching those about to be keel-hauled for knives... dress of the day is underwear.

Cool... I've done 5 deployments with the navy and share your passion for the traditions of old. I'll bring the rope.

Good Lord, even people who looked at such things as rear wheel rotation prior to the draw and front wheel deflection prior to the first shot (meaning folks who don't believe she was truly trying to run him over) will still acknowledge that she actually did hit him... Let me put it this way, if I were to say something like: "for the last time," the car in the video below never left the road would you agree with me?

Right you are, that seems to be the end state here. Every once in a while I take the time (actually waste the time) to look into one of these assertions... and it's only due to a passing interest in the power of deliberate I/O manipulations. Fun to watch but that's only because I previously discounted the effect of such efforts by wrongly assuming that no one would fall for them. But as seen here on the forum, It always generates a visceral response that proves to be polarizing and divisive... that's the point of doing it; the assertion is usually accompanied by a direct (or implied) "prove me wrong" component to give it some legs. The manipulation itself rests on the laws of recency and strength of an idea and it's aimed at low information voters because the smell lingers long after the claim is shown to be bogus. The purveyors of this stuff simply move on to the next I/O event with no accountability for the previous one (once again on full display right here).

The DOJ is clearly behind schedule and the release date has clearly been missed.... but on the other side of it, there are some 500 people (mostly lawyers) working on this and the delay is mostly about the redactions needed to protect victims. I'm guessing you don't believe that though. So..... A couple of simple question then: are you advocating for release without those redactions in place and would you support a court order (for immediate release) knowing that redactions would not be in place? I haven't followed this too closely but as far as I can see, that's really what this comes down to now.

Right back atcha. The act is essentially a tool of last resort when threats to the security of the nation are significant.... it isn't intended to be used as an instrument of convenience; that's exactly what happened (and then some). It would be a struggle but I might have found the capacity to forgive invoking the act had it been done in the absence of a punitive "and then some." That part of it was a big mistake ( meaning BIG MISTAKE). My only response to it is your own thoughtfully articulated words of wisdom: "**** off dude." Most grade 6 students with average reading comprehension and access to an unbiased assessment of the situation would have easily come to a conclusion that parallels that of the court... and apparently eludes you. By all appearances, tougher, smarter, and more articulate than you on your best day.

Your posting on this thread is the only rabid assertion about Nazis that I've bothered to look into. I didn't miss that part, it's actually one of the posts being fact checked by the author. The para below the screen shot you quoted says: Searching Google for both Spanish language translations (archived here and here) did not produce results pointing to Francisco Franco's supporters during the Spanish Civil War in the 1930s. The phrase "Uno de los nuestros" tops the results because it is the Spanish language title for the 1990 film Goodfellas. The embedded links above were continuously showing an overuse error... I was hoping to read them. The direct Spanish translation of Uno de los nuestros is simply "one of ours" and as indicated above, it appears that those same 3 words were also the title of a movie.... and nobody claimed that the movie was Nazi inspired. If you can post those links or a polite rebuttal of the article I would be very happy to read it. I can't imagine that the DHS of any administration or of any political persuasion would deliberately post a Nazi slogan and think no one would notice. I would also note that it isn't conservative minded people (here or anywhere else) who are screaming Nazi at the drop of a hat... that accusation should warrant caution in the making of it and apology if shown to be true (or the accusation itself is shown to be unfounded). As to my trigger finger, rapid target transitions with both eyes open are slowing down a bit but that's an age and eye related thing; apparently there are focusing exercises some say help with that... it's a work in progress, I only just heard about that. At longer ranges though, groupings remain (mostly) sub MOA... thanks for asking.

Here's a fact check that took much longer to read than it did to find

Wait a second now, the US has laws about such things... it was Biden democrats that did this and they did it by holding those laws in abeyance to an extent and for a duration that will be studied by future generations. After Socratic interrogation of AI bot it eventually admitted the following (for whatever it may be worth): In isolation, the position advocating for strict adherence to statutory mandates under the INA is typically the most legally defensible, as it relies on explicit legislative language and established legal precedents. This perspective argues for an unwavering application of the law as written, aligning closely with traditional interpretations of legal accountability in immigration enforcement. Statutory mandates can be set aside or altered through Executive Orders and administrative actions, which can redefine enforcement priorities and policies without changing the underlying law. This approach has been particularly evident under the Biden administration, raising questions about the legality and adherence to statutory obligations. I would also note that the backlash you see now is the fulfilment of an election promise to launch the largest deportation program of undocumented immigrants in US history. IMO, the only thing that qualifies as hypocritical here is pretending that the pain this has caused was anything other than deliberate, avoidable, and perpetrated by democrats for political gain. Since you're fond of using "you people" in your rhetoric here please allow the same courtesy.... as far as I'm concerned: - "You people" did this; - I resent the pain that "you people" caused those who simply hoped for a better life; and - I won't forget that "you people" did it on purpose.

Don't snow the Snow Queen... to quote a "senior member" "YOU can't stop being stupid."

Best I could do.... plug robo's words of wisdom into this critter and press generate. Here's a good one to start with... don't forget to add the duh's: YOU ARE A LIAR and have no idea what traitor means HERE. https://nicevoice.org/ai-voice-generator/homer-simpson/

Duh. It might have had something to do with the hood ornament she was driving away with. What we really need is a Robo to Homer Simpson audio file generator to give voice to your wisdom.

Nobody said don't do immigration, and nobody said don't have a robust and compassionate refugee program. What was being said is if you want to do it, do the bloody thing right. Be mindful of security, be mindful of demographic concentrations, be prepared to recognize cultural differences and invest as required to ease challenging transitions to a secular democratic society and... to be very careful of long standing (and visceral) ethnic animosities and plan to mitigate them accordingly. Most of all, be willing to spend money upfront and do the right thing upfront.. because if you don't you'll pay a higher price later. You ridiculed those concepts and insulted the people suggesting them. At every turn you insisted on doing it badly, you were repeatedly warned that the problem with doing it badly was a potential voter backlash and that the backlash would hurt a lot of innocent people. And here we are... this is eventually coming to places in Europe too, you just got to the tipping point early because of bat shi% crazy democratic policies that went well beyond incompetence and tested the stratospheric levels of buffoonery. It was deliberate... The ability to anticipate situations and apply common sense in a compassionate manner is even better... this could all have been avoided, easily avoided. Would it surprise you to learn that I blame you for this and not the immigrants? Would it surprise you to learn that I dislike this situation as much or more than you do and that I resent the fact that you drove your own country to a predictable and easily avoidable backlash? Where have rational democrats gone? Your inability to asses a growing problem in a timely manner alienated a majority of voters and they voted for strong remedial action... just like they eventually will in some European jurisdictions too. This concludes our discussion... get popcorn and watch the show you wrote and directed. Street level violence is easily countered by people with unlimited resources who are steeped in the knowledge of managing violence. More management in the form of defence in depth will likely be coming your way sooner rather than later. Take a bow... you earned it.

It absolutely wasn't but as always, I'm perfectly prepared to respond in kind to the violence you're encouraging. Given developing circumstances and the rhetoric of the Minnesota Governor, this situation has now pushed into territory that IMO needs to be addressed before people get hurt. Just my opinion of course but I would be incrementally stepping things up to meet the growing threat: - Masking would now be mandatory and there would be no display of badge numbers (assuming any agents are still be doing that); - For reporting purposes and processing complaints I'd immediately move to displayed ZAP numbers (no letters); - Given the Governors rhetoric and the current violence I'd federalize the Minnesota National Guard under the insurrection act of 1807 and immediately deploy them in sufficient numbers to support the ongoing operation; - They would be employed in protective cordon operations in direct support of ICE actions and there would also be a designated riot suppression QRF immediately available during all ICE activities; - Being as Minnesota is cold, I would deploy water cannons as part of the QRF and they'd be using high vis dye so I could more readily identify and detain violent agitators. Ya... a small high vis "ICE" age (of sorts) is coming to your neighbourhood. - In short, I'd now be taking fools like Roboduh at their word and recognize that there can be no rational negotiations with political zealots who's most articulate response to the violence is I know it's NO ONE'S job to diddle minors. Duh ... To fully appreciate the lunacy on display here try repeating that statement in a "Homer Simpson voice." I'm just getting started BTW, under the authority of the same act, Martial Law and lockdowns are on the near horizon. So Mr Hodad, how do you like me now? The question has evolved from "what did you think was going to happen?" to "do you really want what you seem to be asking for?"

It’s actually subordinate to the hatred of those Democrats who stand willing to violently act on it. You should reconsider the source of abuse… are you prepared to condemn violent obstruction, doxing, and personal attacks on agents? There was no shortage of people (of all political stripes) upset about the massive amount of ill-advised and illegal border crossings. You were consistently warned that the level of madness you supported would result in a backlash… that’s exactly what happened and why it happened. As Flybaby would say, “there was an election and you lost.” As it stands, ICE is carrying out duties as assigned, just like they did under the Biden Administration when they were tasked to wave at people streaming across the border. The reason I keep asking what you thought was going to happen is that you seem shocked by a backlash that’s equal and opposite in scope and effect to the one you supported. I could unpack a bunch of stuff here but if you can’t understand why masking has become an SOP and refuse to condemn such things as doxing, delving into any of the more complex issues will be time wasted… I think you’re just looking for someone to roll with and I’m not going to spar with you.

That sounds pretty close to the political cults of far left and far right to me. You need only replace the bold print in your own quote with "political extremists" to see why many consider extreme L/R creatures to be adherents of this new religion. The political centre is shrinking as a direct result of the expansion and acceptance of craziness. That means the territory occupied by folks who would call out the bad behaviour and ridiculous positions of both groups has been vacated... the concept of setting destructive / radical elements adrift in their own lifeboats has been forever abandoned. There will always be an equal and opposite reaction to extremes, in other words it was you who created Trump, you who got him elected, and you who paved the road and built the bridge to Crazy Island. Personally I'd pause the construction effort... Instead of continuing to build the largest political see-saw ever seen, I'd bulldoze the entire structure before the scene you see becomes a scene you haven't seen before. The current situation (and backlash) was perfectly predictable and IMO, you couldn't see it because of your own religious fervour. Now you're busy cutting down all the trees on Crazy Island and don't see the folly of that either. Instead you openly ridicule the people who ask what the ships (needed to escape Crazy Island) will be built out of. I really think you need to get out and see the effects of this degree of polarization in other places in order to understand what you don't want to happen in your own house. As it stands now, you and Herb think you're smart enough to make it all work, that people will leave old animosities and conflicts behind on arrival at your house only to find that you can't even get through Christmas dinner with your own relatives... or carry on a polite conversation on a public forum with strangers. In the I/O and CRM world it's called "strength of an idea," it's largely constructed on a foundation of faith and the complete disregard of growing evidence to the contrary. It causes people to ignore ambient conditions and stick to the original plan in the face of significant situational changes that warrant consideration, the development of a new plan, or the modification of an old one. It's the reason progressives don't do well in the military (IMO of course). Anyway, if you can pen the quote above you should also be able to see a reflection in the bathroom mirror.