Lol. I’M narrow minded?!? ROTFLMFAHS!!!

Who told you that?! They lied.

Wiki-Five House Committees (Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, Judiciary, and Oversight and Government Reform) initiated their own inquiries soon after the attack. The Republicans on these five House Committees delivered an interim report to the Members of the House Republican Conference on April 23, 2013. The interim report, which contains the conclusions of the Republican majority staff, signed only by the five Republican chairmen of those committees and stated "This staff report has not been officially adopted by the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, or the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and therefore may not necessarily reflect the views of their Members," was critical of the Obama Administration's actions before, during, and after the attack. Among dozens of findings, the report states that:

"Senior State Department officials knew that the threat environment in Benghazi was high and that the Benghazi compound was vulnerable and unable to withstand an attack, yet the department continued to systematically withdraw security personnel"
The "[Obama] Administration willfully perpetuated a deliberately misleading and incomplete narrative that the attacks evolved from a political demonstration caused by a YouTube video."
"... after a White House Deputies Meeting on Saturday, September 15, 2012, the Administration altered the talking points to remove references to the likely participation of Islamic extremists in the attacks. The Administration also removed references to the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa'ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya ..."
"The Administration deflected responsibility by blaming the IC [intelligence community] for the information it communicated to the public in both the talking points and the subsequent narrative it perpetuated."
Democrats on the five committees criticized the report, which they said had been written without Democratic input, as a "partisan Republican" work that was "unnecessarily politicizing our national security".

Also “ Democrats on the committee certainly say this was political and politically constructed. They say there were many witnesses whose testimony wasn't released because it supported the administration and particularly supported Hillary Clinton.”

There were 8 Benghazi investigations, 7 of which were only done as political attacks on Clinton to hurt her presidential run, admitted by McCarthy and others on tape. That’s why, even though their Republican led investigations found no wrongdoing he called it a win against Clinton because the accusations hurt her politically.

You get what you call one point of view because one side, the anti democracy pro-sedition side, refuses to testify, ignores subpoenas, and hides and destroys evidence….the same “side” that boycotted the investigations and refused to authorize a non partisan outside investigation, then whined they weren’t being allowed to participate…the treason side….your side.
They have absolutely been able to present another side…under oath. Trump has an open invitation, as do all his co-conspirators that ignored subpoenas. They refuse, or are incapable.
There have been plenty of Trump officials who did give their point of view, and every one has said Trump was clearly attempting a coup, knew he lost the election early, knew his plots were absolutely illegal, and many quit on Jan 6 when it became obvious he was willing to violently attack America and his own VP intentionally to retain power by any means.
You know this, you just hope someone else is as dumb as you act and can be fooled into believing your nonsense that this is a partisan politically motivated hatchet job, not an investigation into the worst attack against America on the mainland since the Southern Insurrection (otherwise known as the civil war).

Come home to the unique flavor of shattering the grand illusion.
Come home, to Simple Rick’s.

https://videosift.com/video/Simple-Ricks-Freedom-Wafer-Select

No doubt the votes are made politically (I mean, how can it not be? Albeit well deserved.) in support of Ukraine, regardless of the performance's own merit. However, Stefania is a great selection for the country. It's relatable on a human level as well as timely amid of the invasion. I hope Kalush Orchestra won't self-doubt the win as a sympathy vote.

I'm more concern about the outcome's consequence though... so EuroVision will held in Ukraine next year. And Zelensky mentioned that he hope it can be held in Mariupol? The logistic & security must be a major headache if the war drags on. Something need to "happen" to Putin pronto.

This is the performance at the venue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1fl60ypdLs

Just gonna leave this here for you…..


Prior to his recent appearance in new Orleans Trump had sent out requests to his small donors saying, Hey, I'm gonna be in new Orleans and I want you to come with me and I'm gonna pay for your flight pay for the accommodations. And you one lucky donor is going to have dinner with me, Donald Trump himself, but you gotta donate to get into the, you know, contest, I guess you would call it. But after they got donations, Trump went to new Orleans, he talked to his donors and then he left. There was no winner. Nobody was selected. He solicited donations based on a contest that apparently they didn't even run.

Lemme guess, you don’t care he’s still a thief, stealing from his followers, nothing burger.

I always prefer these type of mostly hand-drawn animation than the CG fare we get all the time now.

It's one the select few animated movies I revisit every now and then outside of Ghibli Studios.

@newtboy,

A company cancelling a multi-billion dollar project means multi-billion dollars not spent on the work of the project, that many jobs out of the economy. Exactly the same as a car manufacturer shutting down for a week, by your logic nothing was lost, the company just stopped spending money for a couple days...

I only support the groups right to protest, and not to illegally block roads or borders. I stand by my wish is for their prompt arrest when illegal blocking roads, borders or places of business.

That said, I believe it also wrong of me to fail to point out that our federal government has continually refused to act as I would wish in promptly shutting down illegal blockades. This is the very first instance were they've shown any interest in a prompt police enforced end, and they've in fact jump much further to invoking a declaration of national emergency so they can also target protesters bank accounts directly and without court orders.

An analogy would be someone that supports arresting people for possession of marijuana. The government then proceeds to only selectively enforce that law, say only acting to make arrests when people are a particular creed or color. It's perfectly consistent to believe the government arrests are wrong and unfair, and to NOT support them, while at the same time still believing the idea of the rule applied fairly being a good idea.

One side is about what I think the line for protest should be:
-I believe the right to protest should be independent of creed or belief, and should only be restricted when actions taken are illegal.(Ideally illegal being defined as impeding on freedoms of others)

By that, the convoy blockade of border or streets should have led to immediate arrests.

In the eye of fairness though, the last two years have already seen at a minimum 3 major protests, that included illegal blockades of work sites and railways and those were ALL allowed to run for weeks and in 2 cases months. The government of the day even tripped over themselves to message their support for the overall causes of the protestors.

In that light, it's wrong to simply ignore the fact that the first protest that is likely to vote conservative is the ONLY one where the government immediately condemns everything about them and feels compelled to intervene urgently.

Churches were literally burning last summer, and our PM's public statements spent most of their time sympathizing with the anger before pleading that burning churches isn't helpful. Where'd all that compassion for folks that you disagree with go when it meant a small number of downtown Ottawa business shutdown and horns honking go. Now our PM invokes terrorizing of the populace.

Trudeau's actions have been distressingly similar to Trump's as the division in our country grows, he's using his words to reach out to the extreme end of his side of the aisle, while tossing gasoline and vitriol onto his opposition. It's making things worse in the worst possible way when we need leaders uniting instead of stoking further division.

Just incase you're afraid of- you know- facing reality

========================================


IQ testing and the eugenics movement in the United States

Eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior,[39][40][41] played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States during the Progressive Era, from the late 19th century until US involvement in World War II.[42][43]

The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of the British Scientist Sir Francis Galton. In 1883, Galton first used the word eugenics to describe the biological improvement of human genes and the concept of being "well-born".[44][45] He believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired primarily through genetics and that eugenics could be implemented through selective breeding in order for the human race to improve in its overall quality, therefore allowing for humans to direct their own evolution.[46]

Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).[47]

Unlike Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to eliminate "undesirable" traits.[48] Goddard used the term "feeble-minded" to refer to people who did not perform well on the test. He argued that "feeble-mindedness" was caused by heredity, and thus feeble-minded people should be prevented from giving birth, either by institutional isolation or sterilization surgeries.[47] At first, sterilization targeted the disabled, but was later extended to poor people. Goddard's intelligence test was endorsed by the eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states adopted the sterilization laws at different paces. These laws, whose constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court in their 1927 ruling Buck v. Bell, forced over 60,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.[49]

California's sterilization program was so effective that the Nazis turned to the government for advice on how to prevent the birth of the "unfit".[50] While the US eugenics movement lost much of its momentum in the 1940s in view of the horrors of Nazi Germany, advocates of eugenics (including Nazi geneticist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer) continued to work and promote their ideas in the United States.[50] In later decades, some eugenic principles have made a resurgence as a voluntary means of selective reproduction, with some calling them "new eugenics".[51] As it becomes possible to test for and correlate genes with IQ (and its proxies),[52] ethicists and embryonic genetic testing companies are attempting to understand the ways in which the technology can be ethically deployed.[53]

Is he missing the point that these selected forces were allegedly under the direction of the pro Trump DOJ, ….or that people on Trump’s team told the riot planners that armed forces would be there to protect the rioters?!
Why is he so sure they were there to protect congress?

I think you are making the mistake of believing all on the left believe what the most extreme far lefties do.

Yes, some have attacked Chappel, but far more leftists have come to his defense….I will. What I’ve heard is FAR from transphobic.
He doesn’t limit that to Islam, all religious extremists are prone to violence, so only a select few looking for Islamophobia call it that, IMO.
Only the insane trans community thinks trans women are full 100% women. I ignore people like that. They don’t live in reality. I’m not alone on the left thinking that.
Edit: I misunderstood…sorry. Yes, the far left “feminist” segment does think fair trial=don’t believe the women. That’s insanity….as is thinking you should lock people up based on one person’s unverified accusation. I think most leftists think you should investigate any claim of abuse and bring charges when appropriate, not just outright believe every one.

Yes, I think you’re wrong. Those have been attacked by extremely tiny, but vocal minorities on the very far left, not main stream leftists nor centrists. Just as all on the right aren’t raving lunatic Trumpists that gladly put orange daddy before reality, country, and democracy, all on the left aren’t as you’ve described them….very few are.

Explain why, since Republicans didn’t want a bipartisan investigation, and didn’t want the Democrats to investigate alone, why are they perpetrating this new fraud to illicitly determine the evidence against them?

Records have revealed that Republican Representative Jim Banks has been conducting his own version of a January 6th investigation, in spite of the fact that he was kicked off the Select Committee before it even began. Banks has been writing to government agencies and even tech companies, claiming to be a "ranking member" of the committee who needs access to the same materials these groups handed over to the Select Committee. This seems like a lot of fraud by Banks, who was an integral part of the big lie that sparked the Jan 6 coup attempt, so totally ineligible to investigate since he will be a witness.

The only logical interpretation is he, and may other Republicans, can’t afford to guess what the committee knows because they would implicate themselves further by denying charges no one has brought against them yet and corroborating evidence they don’t realize implicates them. They’re terrified that not just Trump’s, but their actions will come to light and they’ll be exposed and removed from office….and horrified that their stupidity has put them in a place where they don’t have anyone in the committee willing to leak the evidence to them.

laowhy86, who made the underlying video, lists his sources in his YouTube description as:

* https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-china-bgi-dna/
* https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2019/08/its-high-time-germany-fund-and-fix-its-military/159149/
* https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/Directors-Select-Articles/Nanatechnology/
* https://nonproliferation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/scientific_risk_assessment_genetic_weapon_systems06_cover.pdf

I've not checked the video's claims against his sources, but didn't hear anything about bioweapons or the PRC/CCP's interest in them that seemed surprising.

The video did strike me as partisan: I have no doubt that the USG is also working on weaponizing precision medicine. While I don't like partisan presentations, I recognize that may be acceptable to keep a topic tractable (thus, "Chinese genetic bioweapons" v "all genetic bioweapons").

I think this is a very important topic, so would like to see the _ideas_ discussed - not just our political differences exposed.

Can anyone expressing concerns about the original video indicate which _ideas_ they think are incorrect or overstated? (I'm not interested in the partisan aspect of the video: I'm aware of that already.)

will give points for the song selection.

was a time the Westbobos were extremists to the hilt. now they could run booths at a chump rally. make a killing w/the homophobic tees.

Find a video in a subreddit. Down at the bottom is a share option. Choose Embed.

I usually select dark mode in the options, then copy and paste the embed. I'm still trying to get &mute=0 to work. Sometimes it seems it does when I manually add it to the embed string, other times it doesn't. If you figure it out let me know, because by default the videos are muted.

My recollection is, from maybe as early as Feb 2020, immunologists had studied the DNA and rna of the virus and said unequivocally that it was not "created" using any known method of gene manipulation or DNA recoding. Since that's what most people think China is being accused of, it's important to be clear that this possibility was ruled out early and without question....all known methods of creating viruses by gene/DNA manipulation leave tell tale evidence that can identify the exact type/method of manipulation done, and none was found.

It's possible that the lab, through unnatural selection, developed the natural disease into something more dangerous then lost containment...I don't see how, without records indicating they did that, it would be possible to differentiate between that and natural selection in the wild. IMO it's most likely to have spread from wet markets while also being studied in the lab that exists because these diseases are prevalent naturally in the area.