zydeco

I know in the instance of myself, I rarely use either word. Others use them either frequently or regularly, or consistently.

This is a thread about the Michael Brown shooting. It would be ever so pleasant if certain posters stopped trying to turn every single thread in which they participate into a discussion of themselves.

A lot of people in Thailand patted themselves on the back for their economic performance over the past four or five decades. But that prosperity came about because of massive inflows of American money into infrastructure projects and a follow up with Japanese investment. Thailand has since chosen to bite the hands that feed it, turning against the US and thumbing its nose at Japan while making goo-goo eyes towards China. Now, they're about to suffer the consequences as America turns to Vietnam and bypasses Thailand.

Bar stools are getting warmed up.

Most of these protests consists of just handfuls of people.

I thought the President had decided he did not have the Constitutional authority to change laws.

That is what he said publicly at least 25 times.

It seems that virtually every action Obama takes destabilizes the country, whether the action is at home or abroad. While the rule of law is dismissed for illegals and rioters, the heavy hand of prosecution descends on anyone mildly running afoul of EEOC guidelines, civil rights interpretations, or so-called hate laws. This is what the late Sam Francis, with whose foreign policy I have several severe disagreements, accurately defined as anarcho-tyranny. Government creates the circumstances where the law is easily disregarded by favored groups but is draconian in its applications towards targeted groups.

All the sucking up to China, willing to be their toxic waste dump, buying their tofu trains, and bringing in their high quality tourists and pffft. They still lose.

Interesting passage in the story:

German media have been complaining for months about their news sites being bombarded with pro-Russian comments. German security sources say they are part of an organized offensive steered from the Kremlin.

Like the Chinese, the Russians seem to be using government stooges to infiltrate social media sites. I wonder where else they might be operating? Hmmm. Makes every pro-Russian statement on any board anywhere look suspect.

In a world where politicians want to regulate social media and the internet for inflammatory speech and send people posting on a message board to jail, what will happen to Michael Brown's stepfather, who actually did participate in a riot and incite others around him to burn down buildings? Free pass or go to jail? http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-brown-stepfather-burn-down-20141125-story.html

Yea, there are a lot of tough nuts to crack. Still doing nothing can lead to more deaths like this. What to do to protect the police officer when faced with a perceived threat to their or another's life? Agree that teaching children right from wrong is a difficult task...that's if they even listen and heed. I would think mandating toy guns be made of bright colored plastic would not hurt. If one child's life is spared then it's a win. As pointed out, real guns could be made or coated with bright color. Criminals are always coming up with new ideas but the case here addresses children's toys. If an adult points a brightly colored gun...well, police take the age and intent into consideration in the split second decision. Bright colored weapon in hand of child - use non legal shot or means. Bright colored weapon in hand of an adult - if judged to be reasonable doubt, I certainly would not find the officer was not justified in stopping the threat by letal force.

.

What happens if a child has a real gun, that's been painted pink?

Non-lethal force used when a child of 12 is involved? They are stopped from being a danger and suffer the consequences of pointing a weapon at a police officer. Or is the purpose to kill?

FYI, there are armed 12 year olds who carry out shootings successfully. No doubt the police are conscious of exactly this type situation. http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303448104579149674154922120

And SteveH brings out his flame thrower while trying to divert the thread into a race thread.

PC gone crazy..... We will eventually reach a point in time where we will all have to hide our black people in case someone thinks it is racist to have any living in your country.

I think it is an honour to be Santa's right hand man regardless of colour.

Except, it wasn't a black man.

"...a servant with a black painted face..."

Sort of like Laurence Olivier's portrayal with a black painted face of Shakespeare's Othello. Othello and Black Pete, you see, are both Moors.

BTW, people citing "papers" should realize that not all papers are of equal value. Above, for example, a poster cites a paper produced for CATO. Now, there is nothing wrong with that. But realize CATO is a libertarian advocacy organization. For its underlying argument, the above paper cites another paper published by the CATO Institute!!! Borjas, who I cite above, is publishing in the Journal of Human Capital, a peer reviewed professional journal from the University of Chicago Press. Sources matter, too. Compare the sources. This is the way scholars determine A-level research from lesser research and from advocacy journalism. And it takes time to study what is being written. Be prepared for n-u-a-n-c-e. Scholarly studies are usually nuanced. People looking for descriptions such as "teabagger," "faux news," and "wing nutter," are likely to be disappointed.

Of course, anybody interested in an actual scholarly study of this issue just might approach the leading expert on the subject, George Borjas. Here is the broadcast of a UC roundtable on immigration and economic conditions: http://www.uctv.tv/shows/George-J-Borjas-Costs-of-Immigration-Economics-Roundtable-11726

For those who prefer scholarly articles: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/gborjas/publications/journal/JHC2015.pdf

'Would you prefer "Gentle Giant?"'

Thats a silly reply.

I would have preffered 'Mr Brown', that would have shown some respect. But I figure there's not much of that over there.

No more silly than someone reading a news report and dismissing the facts and everything in it ("tells me enough"), because there was a missing honorific in the article.

Officer Wilson will not be indicted after a careful examination of all the evidence. Justice has been served.

However, what comes next with Al Sharpton and the other racial agitators?

Not everyone will agree justice has been served without viewing the evidence that was used to make that decision. Multiple bullets into an unarmed man needs to be explained.

"Brown, an 18-year-old African American, was shot dead after he was pulled over by the Mr Wilson in August while walking down the middle of the road with a friend, Dorian Johnson.

Mr Wilson says Brown leant through his window and attacked him, at which time two shots were fired, once of them hitting Brown's arm. According to Mr Wilson, Brown then ran away, stopped and turned to lunge at him, at which point he shot Brown at least six times.

According to evidence presented Brown and his friend had been earlier stolen cigars from a local store, and Mr Wilson considered them suspects for the theft." (From above news post)

It was explained thoroughly to the grand jury which saw and heard all of the evidence.

There was blood in the officer's car and wounds to his face from Brown leaning into his car and attacking him. The officer then fired twice, hitting Brown in the arm. The officer stated that due to the size of Brown he didn't think he could take a third blow to the face without losing consciousness so he fired.

Brown left, the officer followed and Brown turned back to attack the officer. That's when the idiot got himself shot. Brown was way too big for the officer to handle physically, Brown had punched the officer wounding him, and when he turned and came back the officer had NO obligation to accept any more bodily injury from Brown.

End of.

Interesting to see that the officer is referred to as 'Mr Wilson', and the victim simply as 'Brown'.

That tells me enough.

Would you prefer "Gentle Giant?"

The news is saying it will be announced at 8:00 PM CST, It's 7:41 right now. 20 minutes.

Announcing that late and withholding announcement makes me wonder if they are gearing up for a backlash from a decision not to charge.

We'll see.

Edit: Officials are calling for "mutual respect and restraint."

Maybe the thinking is that a lot of the crowd will go inside to watch Monday Night Football at 8 pm. That'll leave the anarchists and the out of towners to deal with.

Almost every one of you guys is almost always well and readily researched at almost any given thread.

I am of course commending you.

The news network ratings are however called into legitimate question because the television rating agencies check in throughout the 24 hour cycle. The great number of loyalists who watch Faux keep it on throughout the day, which jiggers and skews the ratings.

CNN viewers for instance check in an out during a given day based on the viewer's schedule and the value to each viewer of the news of the day. Breaking news gets some continuous viewership, but most viewers check in at times convenient to them then channel surf, network surf.

Faux viewers are however junkies who eat, breathe, sit through Faux continuously and endlessly. It thus seems Faux has this massive number of viewers when it is in fact the same old unemployed and on welfare Buster and Billie Six Pack sitting there.

"Old unemployed and on welfare?" I sure hope the people who are in charge of this forum are keeping track and present you with some sort of an award for the most immature, nonsensical, and idiotic posts.

God bless Fox News, for keeping people informed with up to date information regarding Obama's lunacy from granting amnesty to several million illegals, to his lies and deception about ObamCare.

He's a hipster. Probably watches soccer and drinks craft beer.

Amnesty does NOT equal citizenship. Amnesty is forgiveness for a crime and suspension of punishment. Illegals are being given amnesty, because they are not being held liable for their illegal entry into the US. And they are not receiving the appropriate punishment, deportation. Instead, they are given a green card and freedom from prosecution for not paying taxes and/or stealing other people's identity and social security numbers. If I or any other citizen did that, we would be in prison.

To be honest the video summed up my daily experience of Thailand and it beautiful people. Of course you come across some not so nice people as you would in any country but in Thailand they are the exception not the rule. Not like back in the UK where nearly all I came across are just plain rude. For all those Farang who made the Thai bashing statements ive said it before and will say it again. Go home. Im sure you will be welcome back with open arms. Well sort of.

I agree with you. And I've changed in that regard. Used to be that I felt people saying "go home" were just missing the bigger picture and justifying what are some legitimate problems in Thailand. But when you read a thread like this one, and see all the bile, bitterness, anger, and outright hatred pour out from so many people on such an innocuous but clever little advertisement, you must sit back and simply be amazed that those here in Thailand choose to remain in Thailand. Some people seem not to have a single happy moment in their lives. Heck,even if all I did was sit on a barstool and suck down beer, at least once in a while I would look out and enjoy the sunset, the weather, and the ease of getting around in Thailand.

I could not agree more. I cant wait to see the Tourist Dpt in the UK to produce there video which would be a great bit of fiction. What would they sell? The wonderful weather? The friendly people? The comments on here sometimes make me ashamed to be a Farang. At least this video which was well presented is the experience of so many aliens who live here. I would like to see more of them come on TV and offer some statements to negate some of these bitter and twisted farangs who in my opinion should not even be here. Gives us all a bad name.

Well it reminds me that my country released promo vid too.

Here it is

less fiction more facts

And absolutely nothing in that video makes me want to go to Poland. Weee! A Pole invented the mine detector. A Pole did that; a Pole did this. If that is the criteria for visiting a country, where exactly does Poland fit on list of Nobel Prize winners? Hint: most of them became Israelis. No, thanks. Thailand not only looks like Paradise compared to Poland. It is paradise compared to all the dark, cold, gloomy, grey, rainy Eurostans.

1. People who come to the USA to work can be handled by the work programs already in place which I linked earlier.

2. People are coming to the USA for the dole. They want me to support them because they don't feel like working (more than 50% are using some kind of social service).

3. You have an education and can contribute to the US economy and it is not problem getting in legally. The US would have no doctors, 7/11 owners or small hotel managers if it was not for Pakistan.

4. I think Australia is sending people to Cambodia to scare them. Kind of like a penal colony. I don't think they intend to send many because people will realize almost anywhere is better than Cambodia.

The answer to the US problems is a simple one. Secure the border. The only reason Obama wants illegals (to become legal) in is they will vote Democratic. Is this so hard to figure out?

1 you have work programmes on paper. They don't seem to be working. Fix them.

2. Don't give them the dole then. As i said earlier, that won't stop them. They come for work, not the dole.

3. Not disputing that. I'm taking about a part of the system that no one seems to want to find a solution for.

4. No doubt. But they have to be housed somewhere first, in Australia's case, years before claims are processed and appealed. A half a million dollars per year per person I think is the figure. If the maths work for you, go for it.

Strengthening the border, by all means. But fences don't always work.

Per your #1, the reason they "don't work" is that corporate interests go around them, because they pay too much. They want even cheaper labor. If you followed what the WGA, which is THE prime culprit, is doing to undermine programs designed to help them, you might have a little more insight into this situation.

I dont quite buy the corporate interests theory. In a congress where members basically have more corporate sponsorship than your average NFL quarterback, if corporate interests wanted this the issue would have been settled years ago without a whimper.

But what about what I specifically alluded to? What about the WGA? What about the existing programs?

Where did I say it was not okay for you to try and ship refugees off?

My only point, which I said politely, was that you are mixing two narratives.

Sure you have refugees, people who enter the U.S. fleeing political presection and seeking protection from the US.

How you handle them is totally different as to you handle illegal immigrants who are coming to the US for work.

I said the quantum of the number of people you are dealing with makes it hard to ship people anywhere.

Australia deals with a few thousand refugees coming by boat in total and it cost BILLIONS of dollars just house and process then offshore.

If you think sending your illegal inmigrants offshore, and people here have quoted there are millions of them, imagine the cost.

I didn't say don't do it, I just made the point it's probably going to be unfeasible and based on cost experiences in Australia for a few thousand, very very expensive for the US.

So no where did I say 'no don't do it' I just made the point about practicality and that you are probably going to have to look for a different solution.

So fine, if you want to propose a programme of offshoring your problems, that is going to have to cost you trillions of dollars, feel free to propose it to your representitive and make sure you let him or her know the cheque they'll need to cut, and the taxes they'll need to raise, to fund it.

Or as I'm guessing as a free marketeer, like I'm guessing you are claiming to be, you can drop the dumbass expensive government led solutions, and bite the bullet and come up with a better system that major sections of the economy are crying out for.

1. People who come to the USA to work can be handled by the work programs already in place which I linked earlier.

2. People are coming to the USA for the dole. They want me to support them because they don't feel like working (more than 50% are using some kind of social service).

3. You have an education and can contribute to the US economy and it is not problem getting in legally. The US would have no doctors, 7/11 owners or small hotel managers if it was not for Pakistan.

4. I think Australia is sending people to Cambodia to scare them. Kind of like a penal colony. I don't think they intend to send many because people will realize almost anywhere is better than Cambodia.

The answer to the US problems is a simple one. Secure the border. The only reason Obama wants illegals (to become legal) in is they will vote Democratic. Is this so hard to figure out?

1 you have work programmes on paper. They don't seem to be working. Fix them.

2. Don't give them the dole then. As i said earlier, that won't stop them. They come for work, not the dole.

3. Not disputing that. I'm taking about a part of the system that no one seems to want to find a solution for.

4. No doubt. But they have to be housed somewhere first, in Australia's case, years before claims are processed and appealed. A half a million dollars per year per person I think is the figure. If the maths work for you, go for it.

Strengthening the border, by all means. But fences don't always work.

Per your #1, the reason they "don't work" is that corporate interests go around them, because they pay too much. They want even cheaper labor. If you followed what the WGA, which is THE prime culprit, is doing to undermine programs designed to help them, you might have a little more insight into this situation.