Recent Comments by bcglorf subscribe to this feed

George H.W. Bush, American War Criminal

bcglorf says...

I'm guessing there's a non-zero chance that the kind of black-ops missions under Obama(getting bin-laden, drone hits on taliban leaders in Pakistan). Aren't being brought to the commander in chief as regularly these days. I know there's plenty of actions they likely can't take without the President's sign off, but you ahve to imagine that anytime they aren't obligated to do otherwise they are trying to keep their ops off twitter.

Payback said:

I haven't heard, and I'd really like to know...

Has Trump instigated any new mass murdering?
Like, I'm not counting from military actions from troops already in-theatre. Non-status quo.

I mean, has he gone "Hey, lets bomb the shit out of Syrians. They're like the Mexicans of Eastern Europe, aren't they? No? Oh ok, nuke Turkey."

I mean, even Obama escalated actions and robo-killed hundreds (thousands?).

I mean, for all the sleaze and stupidity, has he done anything "war criminal"-ish?

George H.W. Bush, American War Criminal

bcglorf says...

I try and choose my words carefully, it looks like you are still responding to what you think I must mean, rather than what I said. You say you thought I meant jr and the recent war in Iraq when I reference Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait. I was in fact referencing no particular Iraq war, but the overall condition Iraq is in(as per the video and my own earlier reference to same. Maybe some room to misunderstand that, but my full quot if you can read it carefully this time:
“blaming Bush Sr. for Iraq, rather than Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait.”
I did specifically name Bush Sr, which At the least should rule out thinking I’m discussing anything done by Jr.

As for Sr’s war in Iraq, Kuwait was a province of the Iraqi state when Senior came in to liberate it. He also stopped short of removing Saddam, which was imo a mistake for Iraqi’s and the one thing I’d agree would be a fair accusation against him re the overall consition of Iraq today. It left Saddam time for another genocide against the Shia Iraqi’s that had risen up thinking Senior was serious about standing with them. Public opinion though was too much against it and so American forces stopped short of removing Saddam and followed popular opinion. Saddam’s WMD programs where dismantled(which he very much had then) and northern Iraq’s airspace remained occupied by Anerican forces right through until jr’s war. Saddam also continually decieved, obstructed and kicked out the UN inspectors in Iraq there to confirm his full and continued disarmament. Enough so that before jr’s war one of the most vocal anti-war inspectors cited Saddam’s almost certain possession and use of chemical weapons as a reason risking an invasion was too dangerous...

newtboy said:

No sir.

I'm addressing his comment about the invasion of Iraq happening because of "Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait." when that's absolutely not how the invasion was sold to us by W. That's only partially how Desert Shield was sold by Sr. (Keeping in mind the gassing had happened years earlier), but that didn't remove or even target Saddam and barely went into Iraq, so clearly wasn't designed to remove him from power or stop his atrocities, just to stop his expansion into our allies territories.

The invasion of Iraq and direct targeting of Saddam was by W, not Sr. and are what led to the current state of the region far more than any result of Desert Storm...what I thought he meant by "blaming Sr. for Iraq"....I read that as 'blaming Sr. for the current state of Iraq and the region'.
I may have misunderstood what he meant by "blaming Sr for Iraq", but I can tell the difference between bushes.

George H.W. Bush, American War Criminal

bcglorf says...

Stopped watching at "The never ending killing fields of Iraq".

Now, if the speaker goes on to accuse Bush Sr. for failing to remove Saddam after having Liberated Kuwait, I judged too quickly. I'm pretty confident though that this is just more of the revisionist history garbage blaming Bush Sr. for Iraq, rather than Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait.

I mean, if you want to rail against American exceptionalism, at least have the decency to blame the presidents prior to Bush(Carter and Reagan) who supported Saddam after the Iranian revolution, rather than the American president who finally took the right side against one of the most brutal tyrants and dictators of his time.

KrazyKat42 said:

Kinda disagree. His policies in Central America were terrible, but he did a lot of good things. Opening trade with China, the end of the cold war, and the he ended the invasion of Kuwait by backing off.

Robbery Stopped With Swords

bcglorf says...

Also demonstrates that even with handguns effectively banned in Canada, bad guys still seem to get their hands on 'em,

Drachen_Jager said:

I was just going to say that. Looks like it's the father about to take his son's face off actually.

Also, see, Americans? If you don't have guns everywhere, you don't NEED a "good guy with a gun". (also the "good guy with a gun" doesn't end up getting shot by the f-ing police when they show up as has happened twice recently now)

Attack on Titan Movie Clip

bcglorf says...

It gets worse, that's the best part of the movies...

The Attack on Titan anime is one of the absolute best things I've seen, I can't recommend it strongly enough. These live action movies, are the worst movies I've seen, like Battlefield Earth bad. And that is before accounting for the quality of the source material that they brutalized...

These movies are something nobody can enjoy, no idea how they came out as awful as they did. Kevin Smith's story about a producer wanting a giant spider in his movie comes to mind, somebody like that was running the whole show here and nobody ever reigned them in .

artician said:

I really wish they could get their CG together. That looks terrible.

Escalator goes wild in Roma

bcglorf says...

Forget elevators, the videos of escalator failures are terrifying.

You expect to laugh at the out of order escalator sign because oh no, now they are normal stairways, then the reality is that catastrophic escalator failure is human cheese grater mode..

Oregon Woman Finds Letter from Notorious Chinese Labor Camp

Oregon Woman Finds Letter from Notorious Chinese Labor Camp

bcglorf says...

You may have some valid academic point to be made about American problems.

That is however completely overwhelmed by your callous disregard for the suffering of people in actual slave labour camps, by likening them to American prisoners convicted by a jury of their peers to a standard of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt who are forced to work for their 3 square meals per day. Your not wrong to point out flaws in the American system, just incredible callous to the vastly worse suffering of others.

I would say you are morally wrong to exploit said people(and weakening concern for their suffering) to champion a separate cause that matters to you more.

oritteropo said:

I value intelligence, but don't think that culling the slower members of our species is a good idea. In your country though, the outcome of a court case depends on the factors I mentioned. To some degree actual guilt or innocence plays a part, but if the D.A. is out to get you it might take a while for justice to prevail. I can provide examples if you don't believe me.

My points were that slave labour is common in both the U.S. and China, and that although the particular form of discrimination in this video is less common in the U.S., there are other equivalent forms which at least to me make it very much a case of people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

As an aside, religious freedom seems not to apply to the same degree to Muslims in the U.S. as it does to other religions.

'Cornerstore Caroline' calls 911 on 9 year old for 'groping'

bcglorf says...

Soooo,

we believe women, unless they are accusing another even 'weaker' minority...

Ultimately it is fair to make the point that 'believe survivors' isn't meant by many people as a blanket belief of any and all accusations, but rather by the subjective standard of 'credible'. That this is thus remaining a subjective stance rather than an absolute isn't unfair to point out.

Mordhaus said:

The main point of this narrative is that she though a 9 year old black kid bumping into her was a grope. I'm sure if it was a white kid she would have said nothing.

A Scary Time

bcglorf says...

@ChaosEngine:
"The first 3 levels of sexual violence ALL involve no physical contact and are entirely verbal. "
100% fine with this. You can be a creepy sleazebag without touching someone and it's still not ok.


Perhaps you misunderstand. I also oppose verbal harassment and discrimination. I disagree with calling sexist and racist comments acts of violence. I agree with condemning them and acting to stop them.

Real world example, a Canadian student TA at Wilfred Laurier University played a short clip of a publicly broadcast debate over trans pronoun usage between 2 U of T professors in a class. She was brought into a meeting with 3 WLU staff who told her she was horribly wrong for doing so because playing that clip was "an act of violence" against any trans students in the room.

This abuse of language is manipulative and wrong.

I'm a man, and I'm not scared of being accused of sexual assault. None of my male friends are scared either.

With burden of proof I'm thinking beyond merely sexual assault. This already practice in forms in Canada. Ontario has an entire system of Social Justice Tribunals that run parallel to the criminal court system. It's been a gradual transformation of the civil court system, so civil and family courts are lumped in as tribunals now there. The specific one relevant in this case is the human rights tribunal. If the WLU faculty, or a student from the classroom, wanted to file a human rights complaint for the 'violence' they faced, the burden of proof would be a preponderance of the evidence rather than innocent until proven guilty. Which I can even understand in some cases, but lets not say that doesn't make people nervous about being falsely accused. That is not what scares people the most though in Ontario. The social justice tribunals have paid for legal representation for the accusers, and so the government foots the financial costs for the accuser. The accused however is on their own. The erosion of burden of proof and fear of financial damages from malicious or vengeful complaints is a very, very real thing in Canada. Accusations of sexual harassment being just one of many kinds of accusations that you can be damaged by while entirely innocent.

A Scary Time

bcglorf says...

"Second, as I've pointed out before, the idea that we're seeing an epidemic of false accusations is not supported by evidence."

I am seeing a strong movement to demand that accusations be enough to get people suspended, expelled and fired though. The Canadian Federation of Students has been pushing a campaign to improve campus sexual assault policies. Their plan specifically includes things they don't want any policy to have, including any " SANCTIONS FOR VEXATIOUS, MALICIOUS OR FALSE COMPLAINTS". They sigh an example section from Dalhousie University's sexual assault policy that they believe is wrong and should be removed:
"A complaint made in bad faith shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action against the complainant, which shall be commenced in accordance with applicable disciplinary processes. A bad faith complaint is a complaint that is made with a conscious design to mislead or deceive, or with a malicious or fraudulent intent. "

More insidiously, strong movements across Canada are training the workplace on what sexual violence is. The first 3 levels of sexual violence ALL involve no physical contact and are entirely verbal. When people are manipulating language to make actions seem worse than they are, you are acting in bad faith and I think it should be called out.

" If a woman (or a man) comes forward with a claim of sexual assault, they are entitled to be taken seriously."

Agreed, but lots of people are very much arguing that lives should be destroyed then and there, just to be safe and/or to balance things out finally so men can be victimized too so they know how it feels. We'll even right songs to laugh at them when they complain.

IMO, the real issue here is one of deflection. Trump and his cronies
No disagreement there. I both vehemently disagree with virtually everything Trump says or does. At the same time, still don't like how far the condemn the accused pushes are looking to go.

ChaosEngine said:

You can totally be against both. Most reasonable people are.

What you shouldn't do is assume that they are both equally bad and equally prevalent (important note: I'm not saying @bcglorf is doing this.... but other people are definitely doing this).

Obviously, a false accusation of rape is a terrible thing. In the most extreme circumstances, it can lead to having years of your life taken away in prison. But sexual assault is a life sentence, you will carry that to your grave.

Second, as I've pointed out before, the idea that we're seeing an epidemic of false accusations is not supported by evidence. The numbers are hard to come by, but it's not even 1% of actual rapes (nevermind lesser sexual assault like groping, etc).

Finally, where is the abandoning of proof and evidence? Show me someone who has been convicted of sexual assault without any evidence. There's a big difference between accepting an allegation is worth looking into and convicting that person.

If a woman (or a man) comes forward with a claim of sexual assault, they are entitled to be taken seriously. That doesn't mean their alleged assailant is guilty though.

IMO, the real issue here is one of deflection. Trump and his cronies are basically inventing this narrative of victimhood where women are on the lookout for men to falsely accuse of rape, which is patently bullshit.

A Scary Time

bcglorf says...

Not sure that's the analogy you want to go for, what with the counter being to describe how we behave once we grow up...

You are describing women as powerless and perpetual victims, which I think is offensive to women. You then basically say that two wrongs make a right because victims should be allowed to create new victims if it helps them...

Reasonable people disagree with you. If that puts me in the 'wrong' camp, and means I deserve ridicule and attack, you're the problem, not me.

BSR said:

When an infant or child needs something but can't or doesn't know how to communicate it's needs, they will make their problem your problem. They do this by crying or acting out until they get what they need, be it a diaper change or a glass of water or just a hug.

Women have been trying to communicate for eons with little results. Now they are making their problem, your problem.

You may be able to look to them for bravery if that's what you're lacking.

A Scary Time

bcglorf says...

Can I be against both rape AND false accusations of rape? Can I be both scared of abandoning proof and evidence AND for the safety of women?

The scary part of our times is the race to pick a camp and turn on everyone who isn't your camp of thought already. It isn't actually scary, it's horrifying.

Building A Leonardo da Vinci Bridge

The Day Liberty Died

bcglorf says...

@newtboy,
"...there was only one combatant here. *facepalm"

Are you forgetting or ignoring that this incident occurred during the '6 day' war? Israel killed a whole ton of Egyptians in similar fashion that day too. I was making the very modest suggestion that arguing they mistook an American spyboat for an Egyptian spyboat is plausible, more plausible IMO than deliberately attacking an ally.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon