Well then would be saying I and JFK of delusional paranoia.
I saying not so. I'm saying some of these organizations are doing their own thing regardless of American laws and Constitution.

I'm saying believing in shadow government conspiracies is a sign of delusional paranoia.

Bob, I honestly believe you need to be psychology examined. You have apparently gone off the deep end into full blown delusional political paranoia....or perhaps you really are just a Russian troll.

Please acknowledge that your hero Trump has repeatedly suggested that slander and libel laws are too lax (except when applied to his baseless accusations against others) and that the press should be hobbled and stymied if they speak out against him or reveal what he's trying to hide, as in have their licenses and credentials revoked and be sued into bankruptcy or even charged with treason among other sanctions, but published lies that support him are totally acceptable, even praiseworthy.

Or maybe they read it like I did and see zero proof of anything besides republican gullibility.
Nothing there but whining that the process he (Nunez) set up isn't fair when used against his friend, and insinuations that all Federal law enforcement is a liberal conspiracy working for Hillary....patently ridiculous to the point of clinical paranoia if believed.

No one needs marching orders to see reality besides cultists....I noticed you had to wait for yours before replying....those orders, keep shouting bombshell and pretending you understand how this is indisputable proof that Trump is innocent and why you agree federal law enforcement needs to have loyalty testing monthly, with less that perfect loyalty to Trump meaning expulsion.

I bought 32 bitcoins throughout 2012. Now worth close to half a mil. I bought about 4 or 5 grams of DMT over the next two years... each 20 mg of DMT - in my mind - is worth at least $1,000,000. Regardless, even when I started putting money in, there was serious paranoia about the volatility that exists today but isn't as bad as it was back then. You could not trust any of the bitcoin banks or markets back then. A lot of them would just close down and take off with your motherfucking bitcoins, a lot of them would get hacked or say they got hacked, so I always just wanted to get the money transferred out of the bank to a market and released to a trustworthy vendor as fast as possible. So, if you're thinking woulda coulda shoulda - you too probably wouldnah. That on top of the fact that bitcoin transactions took dayyyyssss sometimes, it was fucking slow and a lot of it was through cold hard cash not debit/credit cards...

I would love to be able to get medical marijuana easily in Texas. But the bill they passed in 2015 had so many restrictions it is laughable.

You can only get it if you get low-thc oil. You can only be prescribed it for epilepsy and only then if you haven't responded to federally approved treatments. Assuming you meet those guidelines, you need two different doctors that must be registered with the DPS to both agree that no other medication will help you.

Not bad enough? The state has dragged its feet on actually licensing companies to grow cannabis to make the oil, so that 2 years after the bill was signed a couple of companies are just now able to ramp up production. Then they will need time to convert the product to oil and THEN the state will take some more time to make sure the product 'meets specifications'.

This stupid thing is you can already get low-thc oil on the internet legally that is roughly the same strength. Plus it restricts the most active compound, THC, so it limits drastically who will actually gain any benefit from it.

Since I suffer from two different ailments, both which have been shown to be helped by actual cannabis instead of the oil, I am SOL. I have to take a huge dose of Cymbalta and become zombie-like for a good part of the day, or I can suffer crippling anxiety/depression/fibromyalgia pain. The other fun thing is that the Cymbalta exacerbates my IBS, the other ailment I have that cannabis has been shown to help.

I could cut out a drug with horrible side effects and take a natural drug that could help every single symptom I have, with the only side effects being paranoia and the munchies. But then the pharma company would miss out on the roughly one grand a month that my pills cost my insurance. Can't have that!

PS: That price is for generic Cymbalta now that it is available. Originally it was closer to 2k a month for name brand. Another fun side effect? Cymbalta also fucks up your sex drive, sometimes making you impotent but more frequently making it nigh impossible to orgasm. So you can get erect as a male, but good luck finishing.

Try to stay on track. The USA isn't deemed racist or xenophobic because it has immigration laws, it's because those laws are based on pre-conceived notions and disproportionate paranoia regarding specific countries and (some would believe) countries with high populations of followers of Islam. Immigration laws exist to ensure those wanting to immigrate understand the requirements, and a process exists that in most cases treats folks fairly regardless of where they come from. As Donald Duck has singled out specific countries, thus establishing a priori that all the folks in those countries are bad asses, then yes, this is indeed xenophobia at best but not really racism as the countries on the list are (like the US) a mixed bag and Islam is not a race.

So, if you want to compare immigration policy that exists in the land of the free and the home of the brave, your comparison should be with countries like Syria, Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen that all forbid (well, they used to ...) entry to folks from Israel (always getting the short shtick), Kuwait, Brunei, Kuwait, UAE, Saudi, Pakistan, Oman and Malaysia and there are a few others I can't remember. It's not policy. It's paranoia and xenophobia from The Most Powerful Man on Earth and the fuckwits that butter his toast.

Carry on.

"It's not paranoia when they're really out to get you."

-- Old saying.

The reason Switzerland is the safest place in case of a war is not its bunkers and fall out shelters (though, referencing the book "Place de la Concorde Suisse" by McPhee, this video does do a good job explaining Swiss paranoia)

Switzerland is the best place to hide in a war because:

Everyone from oligarchal and totalitarian states hides their assets there. In Swiss banks. And no one has been stupid enough in 200 years to blow up the bank holding their assets.

Seriously, he's taking a shit on "purist liberals"?

Remind me again, who was speaking up loud and clear about the danger of running another corporatist against a right-wing populist? Who was that again? Was it the strategists and consultants of the DNC? Was it all the celebrities who were „with her“?

Or was it maybe those liberal idiots whose candidate is, I don't know, the most popular politician in the country? Sanders gets cheers from Trump voters at townhalls in red states, and you're putting the blame for Trump's election at the feet of purist liberals?

Honestly, mate. You want to know what a neoliberal disaster looks like? Look at at the White House. Neoliberal policies are the breeding ground of right-wing populists. You think someone like Trump gets elected because of his convincing policy proposals? Right-wing populists are the answers to „centrist“ policies that enrich the few at the cost of the many. Everyone knows the effects, from widescale poverty, historic inequality, the opioid epidemic, all the way to the two-tiered justice system with fraudsters and torturers running free while not being able to pay a parking tickets gets you jailed.

Too abstract for you, Bill? Then look at Detroit. Look at Cleveland. Is that enough of a visual representation of what a neoliberal disaster looks like?

In this situation, they decided to run a corporatist, with the message „America is already great“. How was that supposed to resonate with the working stiff, Bill? The people whose despair is the main driver behind the opioid epidemic, as Case-Deaton has shows us in such detail. Who had the glorious idea to run exclusively on identity politics and ignore the economic plight of the lower class?

Was that the purist liberals, Bill?

Did the purist liberals run a campaign whose own people, if „Shattered“ contains any truth at all, described it as nothing short of a disaster? Even Clinton's own people didn't seem to know why she was running, and were toying with the idea of just going with „it's her turn“. Seriously, the way they describe Clinton's paranoia and refusal to interact with her own staff makes it sound like her campaign was not much less of a clusterfuck than Trump's presidency, from an organizing point of view.

But yeah, go ahead and blame the purist liberals. And Comey, while you're at it. And Russia. And Jill Stein. And fake news. And WikiLeaks. And sexism. Anything but the DNC and their corporate candidate.

Let me know when you're done, maybe then we can have a proper post-mortem of how the Democrats managed to lose the White House, Congress, most state legislatures and Governorships. And we'll start from the top, because we have a saying in German: „der Fisch stinkt vom Kopf her“. Maybe you can get an option to vote against Wall Street, against the war on drugs, against big pharma, against the MIC, and against the destruction of our biosphere. Because you sure as hell didn't have one this time.

Back in the mid 90's some friends and I dropped 3 tabs and went to Disneyland. The first 2 hours were great, Star Tours was a hoot but after that the paranoia sets in. We left after seeing the line for Indiana Jones. Anyone who says they have dosed in an amusement park and had a good time is a liar.

Sure, Javascript can do some great and beneficial things. But along with that comes a massive amount of grey-area stuff like tracking, loading content from "CDNs", etc. And then there's plenty of utterly indefensible crap like XSS attacks, intrusive advertising and malware, etc.

To me, the bad apples spoil the bunch. At least to the extent that I want to be careful to the point of paranoia about what I allow in -- I'm rigorously inspecting every goddamn apple. Admittedly, if you stay on legit and mainstream sites, the chances of stumbling on one of the bad apples are very low. But you're still subject to a hell of a lot more of the grey-area stuff that way.

To me, my scorched-earth approach is worth it both for preventing really nasty stuff AND the grey-area stuff that is getting more invasive all the time.

@ChaosEngine

i have many:teachers,police,firefighters as facebook friends.

during the run up to the election i was posting a ton of my research,analysis and commentary in regards to the election.

this,on it's own,should not be surprising,what WAS surprising is all the support i received from these people and who were simply afraid to like,or comment.

they were literally sharing my work with other people via private messaging.

each and every one expressed to me a fairly robust paranoia that if they liked any of my posts,or commented,that they would receive disciplinary action and that their jobs would be in jeopardy.

i found this very troubling and what i could not,and STILL cannot reconcile,is how some people not only ignore this very subtle form of censorship,but find it a viable and understandable in the realms of social media.

when you restrict what a person can comment or speak on due to fear.this is censorship.

in the case of justine sacco,she was simply making a joke and when put in context..a really damn good one.but due to the self-righteous moralizing of total strangers,her life was destroyed.

now there will be some that may still find this justified,and that is fine,that is their right but what REALLY chills me is that nobody is addressing the much deeper and far more insidious nature of public shaming.basically:other people saw what happened to justine sacco and will modify their social media persona accordingly.

this,in my opinion,will only result in a vanilla goo like substance that offers no challenging ideas,no conflicting opinions that offer an opportunity to discuss and debate difficult subjects,because debate starts with disagreement,and if you impose a fear of retribution by simply posting any content that may be construed as controversial.then the conversation ends...
and we all pay a price for that kind of groupthink.

this will force the really bad and worst of us to go underground,and reside in an echo chamber where their fucked up ideas are parroted back to them,resulting in a confirmation that their worldviews are correct.

conversely...

those who may have good ideas,or wish to engage in controversial subjects,or in the case of justine sacco..make a fucking joke...will be relegated to the "good little worker bee" position.who never challenges power or authority and simply obeys...for fear of losing:financial security,public standing etc etc.

they become fucking stepford wives.

and in my sincere opinion,this is the real danger.

Place de la Concorde Suisse...John McPhee's book exploring Swiss...paranoia...
---All military age men have an automatic weapon at home; the penalties for using it or even open the ammunition other than military duty are severe
---The bridges and tunnels in to the country are rigged with places for Swiss Army Engineers to stick explosives and drop them all
---Airbases tucked into mountain sides; not nuke proof; but damn hard to get at any other way
etc
etc
etc

"in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. "

Harry Lime; Orson Well's "The Third Man"...

Or someone kidnaps your daughter and thanks to your preparedness and special set of skills you realize you're actually Liam Neeson.
This whole guns-for-safety-schtick has been debated online a thousand times. You know what protects you from crime? Tackling the very real social issues like poverty and racism that cause crime.
You have so many guns and yet your crime rate is so shitty. Mass shootings are routine in america. Where are all the good guys with guns to stop the bad guys when you need them?
It's not working. It simply isn't, crunch numbers all you want. Just look at Canada. They have guns. Yet, they seem to live so much safer lives. Is Mexico such a dangerous place because they don't have enough guns? They got the good Heckler&Koch rifles, you know.
You want to fight fights that I say should be avoided in the first place. Fix your social issues and less people will have reasons to try breaking into your home.
Same with the terrorist. Don't just bomb them, disable their ideological rethoric, disable their methods of recruiting.
We have islamic terrorists here in germany. They either try to build bombs (requires actual know-how) or they attack with axes and knives. Something must be working in our favor here. Same can't be said for the citizens of Paris or nightclub visitors in Orlando. They got shot.
The american paranoia is a reaction to an action that can be made far more unlikely to happen. Once you are ready to tackle the issues.
You can bring a fire extinguisher every time you go to the gas station in case a fire breaks out or you can just stop smoking around the gas station.