Someone is devulging

Is anyone surprised?

Well, let's elaborate a bit on the picture, catalonya has always been autonomous to a degree, since this social rift has millenia, centuries and centuries, however during Franco depotism the region (state) suffered a lot of repression in terms of language etc… had to that mix a spanish central government which inherits Franco ideology and has not a solid standing (3 elections to form it and no majority), had to that silence from the government for several decades over this matter, had to that the fact catalonya is supporting almost solo the debt of more than half of spain... and finally sprinkle in top of the cake the fact rajoy is a fucking bastard that ordered police brutality on people voting... Yes it's secessionist all the countries divides are by norm inconstitucional, what is that point worth aniway in the matter? This either goes slowly and calm down noone does nothing, either goes smart and catalonya destroys it's economy and makes Spain go bankrupt forcing the EU to make it solve the issue or get expelled, either goes really bad and some groups start agitating things and they get civil war. Any of those things are not that far fetched seen the history of the place.

Because the truth of the matter is , he was already established in Russia .

Speaker of the house. And the president need to be in jail.

@Frederick: Manafort is accused of money laundering $18 million.  Just to make a point, let's assume that Manafort will be convicted of that… so what?  those crimes were committed BEFORE Manafort joined the Trump team!   Let me re-emphasize this.. the implication is that Trump's campaign was funded in part by the money laundering of Manafort... however, the charges against Manafort's money laundering specify a time period BEFORE Manafort was working on Trump's campaign.. Therefore.. it's impossible that whatever money was generated was done so for Trump's campaign. You are an avid reader of news articles, to your credit.  Surely you are aware of the copious reporting and analysis on the potential for a "Manafort Flip," where Mueller's investigation gathers evidence of his earlier wrongdoings as leverage to cut a deal for juicy testimony on all the (must we use "alleged", lol?) Russian collusion: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/mueller-flipping-manafort-article-1.3598880 …and a great quote from https://abovethelaw.com/2017/10/this-31-page-manafort-indictment-feels-like-flip-bait/ "If somebody had told Paul Manafort, “You’re going to run the Trump campaign for a couple of months, get humiliated and replaced by Steve Bannon, then have your whole life picked through by a former director of the FBI while the president pretends to barely know who you are,” I’m sure he would have given the job a hard pass."   :cheesy2:

@Frederick: Manafort was Trump's campaign manager who resigned months before the election.  Trump barely knew the man. Um, Manny and Trump traveled in the same influence-peddling circles for decades, but of course, I'm sure this group never took the time to kick around ways to back-deal and grease the skids for each other. "Manafort and political strategist and informal Trump adviser Roger J. Stone Jr. co-founded the Washington, D.C.-lobbying firm Black, Manafort, Stone and Kelly in the early 1980s." https://www.yahoo.com/news/brief-history-manaforts-relationship-trump-180905991.html @Frederick: By the way… the murder case I sometimes refer to involves a chief of staff.  For those who don't know, a "chief of staff" is someone who is empowered to perform the actions and speak for the person they are chief of staff for.   It's kind of like having a substitute teacher or guest host on Johnny Carson.  Anyway, in that murder case, a government official charged an (innocent) man with a crime that he was convicted for, and that charge resulted in the falsely accused man being sentenced to life in prison with NO chance of parole!   Now, here comes the crazy part.  The father of the murder victim THANKED the DEFENSE attorney after the conviction.  This is where it gets really crazy.. the best friend of the defense attorney was the chief of staff of that government official at the time of the murder!!  That has got to be the biggest, most outrageous conflict of interest in the history of the planet! Please tell me this is a Halloween prank of yours.  Boo, it's the International Murder Case – endlessly invoked, causing threads to be diverted, offering the same fragments of details that never coalesce into a proper account. It's a triple-decker "nothing burger," as far as the topics on this P&D board are concerned.  Should we get out a timer to see when this murky non-starter will raise its head again?

@flozen: Hard to believe such a bitchin' song only hit #28 on the BillBoard charts in 1986, lol… That song only hit #28?  WTF?  I checked.. and you are correct, but I also looked at what songs were #1 through #27.  In 1986, there were more great songs in one year than in the past 17 years or more (since 2000). On Facebook, I used to attach music video links to about 1/3 of my posts.

@raphjd: I'm a "gun nut" and belong to a shooting club here in the UK.    In the US I owned guns.   I fully support the 2nd Amendment. All that said, everyone knows (should know) that I'm pissed about the that the insanity loophole hasn't been fixed even after The Long Island Railroad shooting.    Colin Ferguson was legally declared a nutter in New York state, but he was able to go to Virgina to get his guns. During Clinton, we had some sensible gun control laws that got fucked up because they were too specific to certain guns, rather than the types of guns they were banning.    As an example, they banned the TEC-9 and for extremely good reasons.   The problem was, the maker stopped making the now banned TEC-9 and started making the TEC-10 which was perfectly legal, even though it was virtually identical.    Instead of banning ALL guns that could easily be converted into SMGs, they only banned a few specific guns and not the type of gun. No one has a legit reason to personally own an SMG (as well as many other types).    I'm in favor of well-regulated gun clubs owning them, or as in the UK, you can personally own a gun, but it must be kept at a gun club. Here's a few videos to wonder about… Apparently, this 9 year old girl's parents felt it was necessary for their lil sweetie to have an uzi to play with. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNIiQ68QyqA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAkdkLUEaKI Oh those crazy kooky KIDS! Halloween version…  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uNoO9xmFHw&feature=youtu.be&t=39

Let's not forget that Obama made it so we can't sue companies that conspire with the US government to do warrantless wiretaps on US citizens. As for this case, I hate it when the government makes it so people can't sue for wrongdoing. The same thing for software companies.    In most of the world, software/gaming companies are protected under the AS IS/No Guarantees rule.  In the UK, it would have to qualify under the wanton and egregious exception in order to be able to sue them. In the UK, doctors, clinics, and hospitals (all medical professionals and businesses) are also under the wanton and egregious exception.  You need 3 independent specialists to confirm that it was "wanton and egregious".  Obviously, that will be extremely rare because they don't want it done to them.    "Collusion" is the word that comes to mind.

I support free speech, but I also support the other "rights". I don't have a problem removing people from the immediate area to prevent the face to face harassment or blocking the entrances.  Across the street doesn't bother me.

When we go with the JUST BELIEVE concept, we end up with the shit we have been seeing over the last 20 year of false rape claims blowing up in international media. YouTube's main "just believe" advocate, Lacy Green, never got into trouble for raping over 4 million people.  We were ignored.  Many of us got threats directly from YouTube over our claims.  They threatened to ban our accounts if we continued the claims against Lacy green.    SJW YouTube protected a mass rapist, despite being publicly supportive of "just believe". As we saw with "Jackie" at UVA, the entire frat was demonized, their frat house had $25,000 with of damage done to it.    No one from UVA or the press apologized for the lies.  The frat had to pay to fix the damage to their frat house.    The faculty that wrote that horrible letter demanding that the entire frat be expelled from UVA, doubled down once the truth came out.  They wrote another letter demanding that the entire frat be expelled even though they were innocent to show that they support expelling rapists. In the opening post of this thread, I listed some cases where "just believe" totally failed society.  People's lives were ruined by "just believe". "Take back the night" girl claimed she was raped and named the supposed rapist.  She only changed her tune when he sued her.  She now claims that she got caught up in the moment and wanted to join in.    She doesn't believe she should be held responsible for falsely claiming he raped her and how that ruined her life. Mattress Girl had her claims of being raped dismissed by the police and even the college which is extremely anti-male thanks to the Obama administration's "Dear Colleague" letters.  However, she was still allowed to drag it out with her mattress girl routine. Duke LaCrosse players are still stained by the false rape claims by a hooker/stripper who lied for whatever reason. The head of the IMF (Strauss-Cohn [sp?]) was brought down and totally ruined by a gold digging bitch.  She was recorded talking to her boyfriend, who was in jail at the time, talking about extorting money from Strauss-Cohn in exchange for dropping the rape claims.    The rape never happened, but it ruined him. I was also jail immediately, rather than the police waiting to see what the CCTV showed.    Thankfully, I was cleared before the press got ahold of the story.    In the UK, rape claimers are protected from the press, even when they are proven to have lied.  The accused (read; MEN) don't have that protection.  Their name is only released once (but not always) it's decided to prosecute them.    I'm under a lifetime gag order from revealing the name of the woman who the police proved lied about me raping her.    I can get up to 10 years in prison if I do. ++++ Throughout the west, we have criminalized speech.  In most of Europe, it's illegal to cause offense.  Canada has gone a similar way.  US cities and states are too. Just because no one NYC has been prosecuted under the law, does not remove the fact that they put it into law. ++++ People all over the left have defended "punch a nazi". If they don't like what you said or might say, they believe they are fully within their right to physically assault you.  Clearly, the opposite does not apply. The left believes it's ok to attack ANYONE who might be the enemy.  Smugglypuff did this.  After the incident at the college campus,  she attacked a retired couple who were out walking their dog nearby.  Not surprisingly, Smugglypuff has a bit of history before this.  She false flagged her high school with hate graffiti.  She was only prosecuted for attacking the retired couple.  Again, not surprisingly, in court, she was a girl, not the trans boy she usually claims to be.  I guess she wanted to take advantage of the female oppression of lighter sentencing. The left claims the moral high ground, but have to hide their faces. ++++ An entire political party is based on SJW, BLM, Feminist and other leftist policies.  How is that an "outlier"?  Europe is filled with that crap, how is that "outlier"? Hillary and her supporters made some of the most hateful claims against the people who didn't support her.  You couldn't support her because of her policies (past and present), it could only be because you are sexist, racist, homophobic, etc, etc, etc, etc etc.  You know, a "deplorable". Madalien Albright famously said that anyone woman who didn't vote for Hillary would burn in hell. The white woman who ran for Chair of the DNC said she would "shut white people down" if she was elected chair.  Everyone, including those running against her, applauded this. In the UK, it's illegal to discriminate against people based on race and sex/gender (and some other aspects).  HOWEVER, we have several cases where the Crown Prosecution has no problem as long as the victim(s) is white males (hetero or gay, it doesn't matter).    This was famously made clear by the college "diversity" officer who posted the sign saying something like "all welcome, except white males" with a picture of her next to it pretending to cry. Sweden brought in Affirmative Action to benefit women where they were under-represented.  A few years ago their supreme court said AA must also benefit men where they are under-represented, so Sweden got rid of AA. Scandinavian countries stopped recording the race/origin of criminals to keep people from seeing the obvious trend. In a lot of Europe, it's illegal to disagree with the official narrative of the WW2 holocaust. As we know, you can deny the Armenian genocide (a jew invented the word based on Armenia) and create a "news" channel based on the group that committed the genocide; The Young Turks.    You can be Armenian and cuck to the Turk who runs the channel and denies the genocide his people committed against your people. You are in a Catch 22 when it comes to Israel.  You are either an anti-semite or an islamophobe.  Oddly, Semites are not just jews, but the people of that region (jews and muslims), but that's another topic. ++++ Prior to the freaks coming out to cause problems, there wasn't an issue with trans-SEXUALS using the bathroom that matches them. NO, trans trenders, gender terrorists and the rest of the assclowns had to kick off because they wanted to be special. Leftists threw real trans people under the bus, to pander to these freaks. ++++ NO.  It's not mainstream.  It's just a few outliers. Let's ignore that mainstream media, the DNC, social media, western government, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc all enforce this shit.

This is part of the argument I had with RoyalCrown89, which in turn got me labeled a racist. You are NEVER allowed to be critical of John Lewis because of his civil rights work 50 years ago.    That means that we have to completely ignore his 35 years as a Congressman.

@cteavin: @Frederick: Trump has incredibly energy, and doesn't seem to neglect anything.   He might be taking some sort of meds to give him stamina.  I'd like some of what he's taking! Maybe but what about her observation that what's wrong with the world will continue to be wrong after Trump, so just spend that energy focused on the US? Have you seen Apocalypse Now? By the end, we meet a man who'd been hiding in the jungle for twenty plus years and when finally caught shows him magazines from twenty, thirty, forty years before that. It's all the same news. Today, it's still the same news. Different names but mostly the same. She is correct.. the USA is going downhill.  Obama worked very hard to make that happen, but didn't finish the job.  Trump's presidency will delay the failure of the USA.  In fact, his changes might have an effect for decades to come - delaying the inevitable.  Had crooked Hillary won that election, the USA would be in very deep doo doo NOW.  She would be under impeachment for very solid, real reasons.

@cteavin: @Frederick: @flozen: Separately, I'm concerned about his recent moves to "play to the base," including the push for puritanical religious freedoms that are rolling back LGBT protections: Now, when you mash these ideas together, and I see Trump feeding on the adulation from his core supporters for these recent "victories," I feel some unease that he will, on the topic of preemptive war with North Korea, think about pleasing the base one more time: If anybody can explain what lesbians have to do with North Korea, let me know. What Flozen is saying is that Trump's base, which includes the religious right a.k.a. people who are gunning for the gays, wants Trump to escalate the situation with North Korea as diplomacy has only enabled Kim. Flozen, I assume, is anti-war and would like to prevent the deaths of countless North/South Koreans. (There's no chance of N. Korea attacking the US, though they could have spies who could cause some mayhem.) Meanwhile, over here in Tokyo, there's very little fuss over the Korea situation. Generally, people seem happy with the tougher stance as no one seems convinced that Kim will actually attack anyone. The news analysis seems to agree that people are happy with Abe's policies towards North Korea (siding with Trump) while all of my students want negotiations. Me? I've had flashbacks to the early 80's and see the whole thing as bravado, not much different from when Regan and Gorbachev were in a war of words and justification for more military spending. Flozen is against anything Trump does. As for negotiating with North Korea… what is there to negotiate?  They already have nukes, they already have ICBMS that can reach any city in the USA within 40 minutes of launch.  Kim Jung Un has repeatedly said he will attack US cities, Guam, and sink Japan into the ocean.  At what point do we stop North Korea?  AFTER they kill millions of people and disrupt the economy of the world?  Already, North Korea is victimizing millions of people... it's OWN citizens in North Korea, and South Korea.  I'm glad that Japan is so confident that the USA will protect them, but consider this.. Kim Jung Un doesn't even need an ICBM to nuke Japan.. he can simply load a nuclear bomb on to a plane or one of his standard rockets and faster than you can say "Hiroshima"  POOF!    Kim has ALREADY sent 2 missiles flying over Japan in the last year. Again.. negotiation... to negotiate what?  NK has already said it will not negotiate with any country other than the USA.. and now they say they will not negotiate with the USA either.  (there is nothing to negotiate).

@raphjd: In NYC, Canada and others, the "extreme left" as you like to portray them, are in charge.   They got shit put into law, that as you showed, isn't needed.   That still doesn't negate the very real fact that the leftist agenda is being put into law. "Don't worry, they won't enforce it" is kinda funny because the left gets extremely butt hurt that blacks still can't vote in some states in the US, under state law.   Gay sex (but not lesbo sex) is still illegal in Texas and 9 other states, despite the USSC ruling.    So why the butt hurt over these things, if they don't matter.    Adultery is illegal in 14 states, don't worry though, not many people get arrested for it.   Sex toys are illegal in at least 9 states (can't confirm the other 2), but don't worry, people rarely go to jail for it. Imagine is the right made all abortion illegal, but said "don't worry, we won't enforce it". In many western countries, the political parties frequently only allow people with certain traits (usually women, but quite often race and/or religion) to run.   As we saw in Canada, women got 50% of the cabinet jobs just because they had vaginas.   Trudeau even said a vag is more important than qualifications when choosing people to be given cabinet positions. Across the US, we are seeing leftists running amuck.   Evergreen is not an exception.   It may be extreme in some of their actions, but they. like college students everywhere, control the college.     Look at the violent protests on college campuses to prevent Milo, Ben Shapiro, and anyone else on the right from speaking. Colleges across the west had trigger warnings, about nearly everything.   The University of Chicago was the first to ban trigger warnings, after having them for a few years. The left has shit on real trans people with their bullshit.    As an example, there was a trans girl (formerly boy) in the same high school as Elliot Cope.  The real trans person had no problems at school.   Once Elliot Cope started her attention seeking shit, the real trans person started getting accused to being like Elliot Cope. Blaire White and Skylar (and real trans like them) are now criminalized because of the left's bullshit.   Bringing this fact up is deemed "transphobia".  Of course it's not transphobia, because I'm defending real trans people. Even with the leftist bias in "real news", we are seeing this shit.   That means that the problem is real and not just outliers as you claim. Any law that is selectively enforced is a law that needs to be abolished. Some examples.. a rape law where only men get charged.  When someone beats their wife, but gets away with it because they are a cop. Here's some semi-true examples to make my point: Speeding citations were only issued to people who drive red cars. Murders only investigated if the victim is white.

@aadam101: This is just an actress looking to get her name out there. There's two of them now. Apparently it was nothing serious, just George pretending to be a dirty old man as a joke.

@flozen: @cteavin: @flozen: In the same arena, if anyone would like to read a piece on "consent" specifically geared to our community, here you go.  And it's from the UK, no less: https://www.gmfa.org.uk/fs162-consent-and-the-gay-community   :cool2: In case you didn't see it, I made a separate topic based on this article you shared. Yes, and  :thx: What's nice about that "Consent" thread – as of this writing -- is that the posters are sharing their own interesting stories about consent, and it's very focused, on-topic, and almost free of hyperbole.  Unfortunately, it still has some classless vulgarity, a trend that seems to have increased as of late, and does nothing to prove a point or lend credibility to the individual. Yes. But not so bad as before. Much easier to read here now. I maybe getting more comfortable to post my opinions here.

@Frederick: The moonbats will want math & science removed from education curricullums!  It's RACIST! "whut da hell you mean dat pi  r squared?    Pie is round!  and it ain't "ARE" but "IS" foo!" "my geometry teacher axed me 'bout a rectangle.. I says to her, 'hey bitch I didn't wreck yo raggedy ass angle!"  "den my teacher told me to use the Euclidian Algorithm.  I didn't even know dat Al Gore had Euclidia!  he musta got that clap from screwin' some skank ho'.  Mah sista has Euclidia!" http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/24/white-privilege-bolstered-by-teaching-math-university-professor-says.html :bithfight: That's not what her paper says. I just read it. Surprisingly, it's actually interesting and has zero to do with white privilege or r_emoving math and science from the curriculum_. Google Books has the two essays the article you posted points to. You can read them for free. The first one, the one the article quotes from, is Chapter Two from page 11 and is actually very interesting hitting on what it means for corporations to run charter schools for profit and how that affects public education. The author then goes on to talk about how those external influences affect the math department. The gist of what she says is that if you're a poor kid in a public school where the teachers have to keep you (unlike charter schools which can remove the student if they underperform) the student feels extra pressure. Math is something they can't relate to because it deals with abstracts disconnected from the students daily experiences. The author is calling for a new way to train math teachers in how to make math accessible while not falling into the mindset that they have to aim for good scores on the national tests. She does say that her families background is activist and that language creeps into her part of the paper. She's also quoting from specialized sociology and math research books that use specific jargon. Combined, it's a lot to take in but she's in no way telling people there needs to be less math. She appears to be saying that there should be less standardized testing or less teaching to take the standardized tests. Read for yourself and decide. https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=z885DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=Political+Conocimiento+for+Teaching+Mathematics:+Why+Teachers+Need+It+and+How+to+Develop+It&source=bl&ots=EHabPgWuOD&sig=Ax54eAquejrBFIiRrreWh8PNoNI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi627mi8YvXAhUMEbwKHV2ZD9EQ6AEINDAC#v=onepage&q=Political%20Conocimiento%20for%20Teaching%20Mathematics%3A%20Why%20Teachers%20Need%20It%20and%20How%20to%20Develop%20It&f=false The other chapter is from page 150. After reading that I became interested in her thought progression. Here's a more accessable paper written in 2013. At least read the first paragraph to get a feeling of her thesis. http://www.creatingbalanceconference.org/resources/wp-content/uploads/formidable/Gutierrez_2013_Politics-of-Urban-Math-Teaching.pdf

@raphjd: You are trying to make it acceptable for politicians to lie to us. If Obama had the moral high ground, then why hide what he was doing?   Snowden would be a non issue if Obama kept his promise to be the most transparent President ever.    Again, Obama lied his ass off. I've pointed out Obama's history with LGBTs equality and his political career.   He was willing to throw LGBTs under the bus to get the next political office.    Hell, he took credit for LGBT equality in Illinois that he had nothing to do with.   Sure, he did some good for LGBTs in Illinois, but only a little.   He did nothing like he loves to claim.   He claims things that happened before he first got elected.   He claims things other people did. I think you're being willfully ignorant of how politics works. Obama could have promised the moon, as Trump can promise a border wall that Mexico pays for, but once he got in office he was bound by the rules of an elected official, not granted the powers of a king. To get anything done he had to work with the Senate and Congress. Do you remember how hard the Republican minorities made it for Obama to do anything? Have you noticed how hard the Republican majorities are making it for Trump? Even if Obama/Trump wanted to do x, y, and z, it wasn't/isn't theirs to do without the backing of both houses and so neither man has lied. You need to make a distinction between lying and keeping a campaign promise, two very different things. Throwing under the bus is rhetoric because you didn't like what he did but that's politics. Do you recall the open mic when Obama was talking with one of Putin's staff? He'll be able to maneuver more after he wins the next election. For LGBT rights that's what he did, he waited till he didn't have to run before putting forth (another) (unpopular) policy. Trump might be different. He was the first President that got in trouble for keeping his campaign promises.