Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by ant.

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by ant.

...and why is that necessary? are Democrats supposed to defend anything any party member does? right or wrong? it's too weird - acting as if this is some 'reality show'?

if anything, there is little connection between what americans, and what the Rs & Ds, wanted or signed up for.

it's a paradox that in the US we have wanted better systems for education, health, or elections that reflexed our true needs...and the government thought they could do it there...while we are STILL waiting to get it here?!!

dude, the truth is what matters. maybe alternative reality is your gig, but some of us rather deal in the IS and not blind faith.

If...and that is a huge 'if'...you want some real light on the subject...try this;

https://www.yahoo.com/news/served-afghanistan-us-marine-twice-100000389.html


we were there to win hearts and minds, and we had a Republican administration to leave that charge?

see the example of a member of t͟h͟a͟t͟ glee and chess club above ˣ

signed up for rubbing out Bin Laden [and his pals], and after he was 'sleeping w/the fishes', our attention should have turned to the problems at home.

EX: again, see the comments above ˣ

didn't jump on the bandwagon for 'nation building' - especially when our nation is/was in need of repair at all most every level imaginable.

EX: like education...to repeat, referred to the example of the commentator above ˣ

Finally, to quote the author of the article, "What happened last week was inevitable, and anyone saying differently is still lying to you."


[To the others, can anyone explain the 'beijing biden' thing? is it one of those off-right things? like covid not being dangerous? or masks are oppression? would ask him to explain but that's too much like asking a heavy one-legged gal to a slow dance.]


BTW: give some odds on the '22 and '24 races!

* crickets riding tumbleweeds *


ˣᵀᵃⁿᵍˡᵉᵈ ᵀʷᶦˢᵗᵉᵈ ᵃⁿᵈ ᵀᵒʳⁿ ᵀʰᵒʳⁿˢ

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by Zawash.

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by Zawash.

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by Zawash.

The Emergency Use Authorization requires that people have the OPTION of taking it.

"FDA must ensure that recipients of the vaccine under an EUA are informed, to the extent practicable given the applicable circumstances, that FDA has authorized the emergency use of the vaccine, of the known and potential benefits and risks, the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown, that they have the option to accept or refuse the vaccine, and of any available alternatives to the product."
https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emergency-use-authorization-vaccines-explained

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by newtboy.

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by eric3579.

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by ant.

Added alternate embed code for this video - backup requested by eric3579.

These boys neither chose the age of conscription nor to go to war. Given their age and the time in the war, they would have been forcably made to fight. If you had the misfortune to be born then and there, thier fate could be yours.

Being in the German army did not imply being a Nazi, the majority of the German population were victims as well, pointlessly lead to slaughter by monsters.

Those of them that would have survived the fighting ended up here. They didn't feed them. They worked until they died. They expected them to die. They wanted them to die.

The Geneva Conventions were signed in 1929 making this an official war crime if that's important to you. I'd say the law does not define ethics, and I'd be happy to say this is wrong regardless of the treaty.

As for alternatives for mine clearance. I'm not a military expert, but I believe there are techniques, equipment, tools or vehicles that can be used to reduce the risk to operators. Frankly it's besides the point. Just because someone cannot think of a solution they prefer over running a death camp, does not mean they are not free to do so.

If you have the time, I'd recommend watching the film. It's excellent. And as with most things, particularly in times of war, it's complicated.

Explain please.

The first wrong was being a Nazi youth invader attacking their neighbors and trying to subjugate or eradicate them....IMO that's actually three wrongs at a minimum, but I digress.

What's the second wrong? Using POWs this way was common practice then....no Geneva convention yet banning it. Most POWs were treated exponentially worse, starved and tortured to death or used as slave labor and worked to death on dangerous projects. By comparison, these Hitler youths were coddled.

Being forced to clean up a small mine field before release is hardly on par with that....there are still allegedly POWs alive in Vietnam and elsewhere....They would jump at the chance to clear mines and be released.

And what's the alternative? Leave the mines to kill civilians? Have the victims of invasion do the dirty work of cleaning up the mess the invading Nazis left? I think forcing the invaders to clean up the mess they made is the ONLY right move, anything else is wrong....like what we do, dropping hundreds of thousands of mines on foreign soil from the air with no idea where most end up and just leaving them to disable a country for generations. That is wrong....this isn't even harsh IMO.

A quick summary of the HR1 'duckery'...

This bill addresses voter access, election integrity and security, campaign finance, and ethics for the three branches of government.

Specifically, the bill expands voter registration (e.g., automatic and same-day registration) and voting access (e.g., vote-by-mail and early voting). It also limits removing voters from voter rolls.

The bill requires states to establish independent redistricting commissions to carry out congressional redistricting.

Additionally, the bill sets forth provisions related to election security, including sharing intelligence information with state election officials, supporting states in securing their election systems, developing a national strategy to protect U.S. democratic institutions, establishing in the legislative branch the National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions, and other provisions to improve the cybersecurity of election systems.

Further, the bill addresses campaign finance, including by expanding the prohibition on campaign spending by foreign nationals, requiring additional disclosure of campaign-related fundraising and spending, requiring additional disclaimers regarding certain political advertising, and establishing an alternative campaign funding system for certain federal offices.

The bill addresses ethics in all three branches of government, including by requiring a code of conduct for Supreme Court Justices, prohibiting Members of the House from serving on the board of a for-profit entity, and establishing additional conflict-of-interest and ethics provisions for federal employees and the White House.

The bill requires the President, the Vice President, and certain candidates for those offices to disclose 10 years of tax returns.

...what is so offensive? where is the downside?

sounds more than fair, honest and these Americans are pushing for an honest voting system. where's your evidence there's any 'duckery' in the bill... 🦜 bob

Yes, given the evidence solely in the previous video, he presented a valid alternate hypothesis, and even 80% convinced Bill Nye.

My only problem with him (as it was presented in this video) was that he seemed sooo confident about the "divide by zero" infinite force denominator part of the equation "obvious error" that he didn't go further. "well they must be wrong because this math makes it impossible".

I do give him kudos though, because he paid on the bet.