kimmy

So Officer Caesar is just taking the fall to protect a system that's actually better than the legal system set out in the constitution? -k

Why do courts need to have their day if great guys like Officer Caesar can do such a great job of administering justice without having to go through all that hassle of courts and lawyers? -k

One of the people currently suing the Baltimore PD over a "nickel ride" is a librarian who was in the police van because her house-party got too loud. The premise that anybody who ends up in a police-van must be a thug who deserves to get maimed or killed is pretty dumb. Heyyy, let's just do away with courts and let the police deal with crime as they decide. Like in Judge Dredd comics! There's nothing to suggest that the "nickel rides" perform any useful function in keeping criminals at bay. They're not deterring crime, they're just getting their jollies, blowing off steam, taking out their frustrations, dealing with little-man syndrome. And that's why people rioted in the streets. -k

And, if you guys are correct, they'll kill each other off and nobody will have to worry about them. I don't even care about Freddie Gray... I'm concerned with ridding police forces of Kwesi Millington and Geoff Mantler type thugs. -k

There's more than one Muslim who believe these things, jacee. An English documentary called "Undercover Mosque" discovered that such sentiment is actually not uncommon among British Muslims; investigative reporting in Canada has found similar views being expressed. One problem we have seen several times is that the imams at many mosques aren't enlightened westerners, they're dumb-asses imported straight from Saudi Arabia, with dumb-ass Saudi Arabian views. -k

...none of which has any bearing on the decision to prosecute thug cops who kill prisoners in custody. -k

Interesting video, good analysis of the theory. When I watched the first season of GoT, I was surprised that they didn't even included Roose Bolton among Robb Stark's group of leading bannermen. They had an unwieldy number of bannermen, and made "the Greatjon" character a composite for several of them; I think Lord Karstark and perhaps the Glovers were also made distinct characters. I had been reading the first book, and even without knowing what was to follow, it was clear even in the first book that Roose was key member of Robb's group. Robb's decisive victory over the Lannister army at Riverrun was largely a result of Roose being able to command a small group of forces to great effect to harass the Lannisters, deceiving them as to the size and location of the northern forces while Robb took the bulk of the northerners to slam shut the trap at Riverrun. Littlefinger said he believes Stannis will triumph because he is the best general in Westeros, but Roose is no slouch. Roose, in the first book, was described as a soft-spoken man of few words who, nonetheless, when he did decide to speak, everybody shut up and listened. When Robb's army arrive at the Twins and find that Walder will not let them through, Robb and his other generals speculate about taking the Twins by force. Roose, speaking of the Twins, says: "That, my lords, is unassailable". Discussion ends. No further discussion of seizing the Twins. Catelyn goes off on her own to negotiate with Walder for passage. The Roose we see on the show is quite close to how I pictured him as I read the first book. -k

Yeah, how dare people enjoy something when somewhere, out there, some Muslim person is having a bad day. -k

Suppose there's this guy Pete. His hobbies include extreme snowboarding, extreme off-road dirtbiking, cliff-diving, base-jumping, bare-hands rock-climbing, and any other adrenaline-junkie activity you can name. One day, for no particular reason, I sneak up on him and drop one of my famous kimmy-busters on his chin. And unexpectedly, he's very badly injured, suffering a massive concussion or a massive brain hemorrhage or something terrible like that, and he's unable to work or live a normal life afterward. Pete can't sleep, feels constant dizziness and nausea, he has difficulty reading and even talking, he can't do any of the things he used to love. And I'm on trial for basically ruining this man's life. My lawyer steps up in front of the judge and says "Your honor, just look at the hobbies Pete did before he was injured! When you consider all of the dangerous, reckless things Pete did,it's practically inevitable that he suffered an injury like this! In fact, it's amazing that he didn't suffer a brain injury sooner!" Sounds pretty ludicrous, right? But that's the argument you and Shady are putting forward. The fact that Freddie Gray had a long record of, apparently smoking and/or selling drugs might have put him at a higher risk of dying violently than somebody who lived a law abiding life. It also put him at higher risk of dying of manslaughter at the hands of a policeman than somebody who lived a law abiding life. But in no way does that absolve the police officer who, you know, actually did the manslaughter. -k {"Well, Freddie Gray was going to die young anyway, so Officer Goodson is just kind of a victim of fate, y'know? It's like, destiny."}

And I'd think it would be much easier to navigate in science, where you have objective facts and data to guide you, than in fields where judgments are based on subjective criteria, intuition, and opinion. That was one of the interesting things we saw in the Sony leaked emails: multi-million dollar decisions being made based on little more than the gut feelings and personal biases of some big executives. Which is more likely: a research team goes chasing the wrong theory because a guy was afraid to tell a girl he had a crush on that her theory sucked? A movie studio spends hundreds of millions of dollars producing a movie that flops because some executives had a mistaken faith in the box office appeal of a movie star or a franchise? A tech company makes a significant investment in a technology product that flops because they misjudged where consumer demand was heading? An advertising campaign flops because some executives had a brain-fart and misjudged the appeal of their premise? I don't think you can name very many cases where scientific research went off the rails because of emotional entanglements in the lab; it's very easy to produce examples of bad decisions that are made in the absence of hard data to go on. I think scientists have it easy in this respect, which is the opposite of what Sir Hunt is suggesting. Women in the office are hardly the only source of problems in decision making. It would be impossible to list all the factors that could lead to bad decisions being made in the work place, but if it was decided to eliminate everything that could result in complications from an office, all you'd have left is an empty room. "Will Smith is our friend, and his movies have made us a lot of money in the past, so just give him as much money as he needs and After Earth will be a big hit for this studio. Trust me." -k

They had a big hit a few years ago with "The Dog Days Are Over" Lately they are back on the radio with this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mKLXUxCMdA -k

Yes, it's always great to hear other peoples' ideas. But I'm curious as to why people give credence to the idea that Sir Tim has special insight into the dynamics of working alongside women that the millions of other men who work alongside women don't have. What makes a scientific research lab so vastly different from other collaborative environments in technical or business or creative fields where communication and exchange of ideas is also vital to success? You seem to be of the belief that his opinion has extra value because he's in a unique situation, but I'm of the belief that his situation isn't really very unique at all. Well, that's a generalization, but it does go back to my earlier comment that the problem isn't with men and women working together, it's with individuals who aren't mature enough to work well in social situations. Hardly unique to male-female dynamics, btw. I earlier referenced William Shockley, "the man who invented the transistor", and his voyage into racist genetics and eugenics. Another tidbit about him is that his Bell Labs co-researchers, John Bardeen and Walter Brattain, both quit and left to work on other projects. The three of them became unable to work together, in a clash of egos-- Shockley believed that he deserved all the credit for the success of the project. The idea that getting women out of the lab would make sure that interpersonal interaction doesn't disrupt the science doesn't hold water; people have all kinds of conflicts with people of the same gender as well. I work in a mostly male environment; I've had interpersonal problems with very few of my co-workers, but I've had lots of male co-workers who had issues working with each other. I think the issue here is that interacting with other humans is tricky and you need to either deal with it or work by yourself. -k

Can you provide an example where a woman *should* have been fired? The Sharon Osborne video you provided is an example of sexist comments, that should have required an apology and maybe a firing, but apparently they got enough negative feedback that they did later have to apologize. Are there some other incidents that should have turned into a big controversy but didn't? That's quite awful. Sarah Gilbert-- the one at the table who has the least interest in penis-- pointed out the obvious double-standard and that it really wasn't funny, but instead of taking the opportunity to dial it back Osborne just continued on and on... I can't imagine somebody being so tone-deaf as to not get that what she was saying was completely disgusting. I'm not even sure why they were discussing the topic in the first place unless it was to play it for lulz. I don't recall a controversy over this, but then I can't actually recall being aware that "The Talk" even existed. -k

I don't know what kind of resume one requires to become a premier's chief of staff. Perhaps there are non-Tories in Alberta who could have done the job. Perhaps people from civic politics. I really don't know. But they've got this veteran guy who they've already worked with, so why gamble on bringing in somebody who doesn't know the job? People were already leery of the NDP's lack of experience at government; yet you're arguing that they should have brought in an inexperienced Albertan rather than go outside the province for an experienced staffer. Some people seem to be acting as if Notley has just appointed Topp premier. He's not premier. She is. He's not the one who's going to be making policy decisions. I hope people aren't to question Notley's Albertan credentials? Keep in mind, Argus, that most of my extended family are those rural conservatives. I understand the raw nerve that language like "colonial administrators" strikes, in a way that I don't think someone from Ontario can truly appreciate. My family lost members to illnesses that would have been easily treated if they'd lived in Ontario instead of a province where medical facilities were second rate at the time. They remember when Alberta was the poorest province, and went bankrupt when the feds pulled their grants out from underneath the provincial government. When dad was in college, eastern-run businesses led by eastern-raised businessmen were asking the government why it was wasting tax-money funding universities in Alberta, when they could just hire college graduates from Ontario. This is stuff that people whose families haven't been in Alberta as long as mine might not be able to relate to, or even know about, and most Albertans, especially in the cities, fall into that category. For families whose roots in the province go back to the days when it was a mostly rural, mostly agricultural province, that history is still remembered. Just growing up in Alberta in years following the creation and demise of the NEP I absorbed some of that hostility myself, almost like second-hand smoke. And like a lot of other Albertans, I got mad when pricks like Jean Chretien and Paul Martin used Alberta as a punching-bag to try to win votes elsewhere. But I think that the intense bitterness, the button Levant is trying to press, that's faded over the years. "The West Wants In" is no longer a relevant slogan; the west IS in. As much as Levant might hope otherwise, anti-Eastern resentment is no longer a significant political factor in Alberta. People are past it. -k

Nobody is saying that his comments invalidate all of his achievements. The guy who invented the transistor-- one of the most significant inventions since the wheel-- later went on to delve into eugenics and race-based theories of intelligence. Isaac Newton was, when not revolutionizing mathematics and physics, studying alchemy and the occult. Compared to those guys, Sir Tim's antiquated ideas about gender segregation seem positively cosmopolitan. But likewise, just because he achieved great success in the field of biochemistry, that doesn't mean that his expertise in other fields is equally profound. Given his stated feelings about working with women, he's no longer suitable to be in a position where he'll have authority to hire and fire and select candidates. That much should be obvious. -k

I don't recall ever saying that... Ok, I assume this is the relevant part: (emphasis mine) And I think the portions I've bolded ought to illustrate the line you actually crossed: you weren't criticizing Islam, you were criticizing a forum member. And certainly, for me (and most other members of the forum, I think) that kind of quip would be something I would take in the spirit it was intended... but for some few thin-skinned people here-- the sort who sign up to argue a single issue, not the kind who are here to participate in a community-- I'm sure they just hit the report button, and the moderator looked at the complaint and thought "well, technically, it's against the rules." I think the sheer volume of posts critical of Islam, written by people like myself, yourself, Argus, Shady, and numerous others, that can be found on this forum prove quite conclusively that Islam is certainly not being protected from criticism by the moderators. There are members here who will respond angrily to criticism of Islam, make excuses, or deflect criticism of Islam by trying to change the topic to something Israel did, but that's not a reflection of the board as a whole or of the moderators. You've been a member of this community for many years, Sharkman, and I think you're a pretty decent guy, but I disagree with what you're saying. -k

Considering that the Baltimore police department policy requires that prisoners be seatbelted during transport, the fact that most Baltimore PD vans don't even have seatbelts is especially hilarious. They've got millions of dollars to pay settlements, but they can't scrape up a few hundred bucks to head down to Princess Auto or Pick-n-Pull and pick up some seatbelts? -k

Terribly sorry to have offended your sensibilities. I had no idea that the plight of the American black people of the pre-Civil Rights Act deep south was such a personal issue for you, but now that you've informed me I will strive to be more considerate in the future. I do find it fascinating when the conservatives bust out the PC card, though. They'll talk about "the war on drugs", "the war on crime", "the war on religion", "the war on Christmas", "the war on families", "the war on sugar", "the war on salt", "the war on obesity", "the war on cars", "the war on graffiti"... but if a political adversary talks about "the war on women", suddenly they're offended because using "war" in this way is "disrespectful to the troops." He had already offered his resignation before any of us had even heard of this news item. Don't blame us. He himself concedes that the blame is his own. Anyway, millions upon millions of men and women work alongside each other every day in all kinds of environments. If some people have a problem doing so, perhaps the problem is their own and not a problem inherent in mixed-gender workplaces. -k

Yeah, or maybe even just a van with seatbelts, AMIRITE?? -k

yes, yes, of course. We all know that Caesar's lawyers will present many fanciful theories as to other possible ways that Gray's spine got severed. Perhaps he already had a broken spine when he was sprinting down the street. Perhaps a band of mysterious assailants entered the fan and maimed Gray while Officer Goodson was stopped at the donut shop. Perhaps there was a second driver on the grassy knoll. Perhaps Officer Goodson kept having to stop sharply to avoid dogs that kept running onto the road, and swerve to avoid dangerous drivers. Previous "nickel ride" testimony has revealed that Baltimore is apparently full of stray dogs and dangerous drivers that make driving a police van practically impossible, even for a veteran like Officer Goodson. So why a "bigger van"? Would it have more luxurious seating? Extra leg-room? En-route snacks? Onboard entertainment system with movies and music? Other frequent-flyer perks? Or would it have spikes on the interior walls, or a built-in gas chamber or electric chair? Something that could have killed Gray in a much shorter drive and saved Officer Goodson a half-hour of his valuable time? What benefits do you imagine this "bigger van" would have provided Officer Goodson and the other police involved in the Freddie Gray incident? -k

Well, we do know that Gray was shackled hand and foot, that he was supposed to have been buckled in with a seatbelt but the police "forgot", and that the van ride was a 40 minute tour of half the city, even though Gray was arrested literally down the street from the station. So if you insist, let's just call it an educated guess. So he deserved "the nickel ride"? what does that even mean? -k

Comparing segregation to other segregation is ignorant? How so? Personally, I think it shows a certain amount of ignorance on Sir Hunt's part. -k

It's pretty funny that somebody who has been here for as long as Sharkman could somehow get the idea that you aren't allowed to criticize Muslims here at the MLW. -k

I didn't compare it to black slavery, Einstein. I compared it to black segregation, because that's exactly what Sir Hunt was advocating: segregation. FFS. How dense do you have to be to miss something that obvious? -k