placeholder

A mere 7.

Can you share with us exactly what is the added value in the war is fighting now? In WW2 it was about liberating Europeans from Nazism. The Korean War was and the UKraine war is about resisting invasion from foes ruled by despots. Even in other wars where the justifications were either based on delusion or deception or some mixture of both, at least there was some sort of appeal to idealism. What is adding value to Israel's campaign against Hamas? Is Israel promising to help rebuild Gaza? To pursue policies different from those it has pursued in the past? As far as I can tell, it's about eliminating Hamas. It can be argued that Israel's plan to exterminate Hamas may be necessary, and that taking vengeance is only incidental (unconvincing), but what higher principle is moving Israelis to look " into death’s eyes without blinking." As for conduct in war. Well, you're setting a very low bar in comparing Israel to Hamas.. Who knows what Israeli troops are up to considering that reporters are mostly banned? A few reports, like the beating of that Gazan poet get some play, but it's mostly darkness.

Nonsense. In Colorado the chemicals being used have to be disclosed. And PFAs are banned. According to your way of magical thinking, absolutely secrecy can turn any chemical into water and therefore no need for disclosure.

Another Pavlovian response instead of an engagement with facts.

Oil and gas producers in Pennsylvania used some 160 million pounds of chemicals that they are not required by law to publicly identify in more than 5,000 gas wells between 2012 and 2022, according to research published on Tuesday. The chemicals may have included per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a toxic and pervasive class of chemicals, according to the report from Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), an activist group that last week co-published a new compilation of studies on the harms of hydraulic fracturing for oil and gas. https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24102023/pennsylvanias-gas-industry-used-160-million-pounds-of-secret-chemicals-possible-pfas/?utm

And of course, as you well know, my comment was directed against the degradation of thought that accompanies war, as exemplified in this sentiment: "Looking into death’s eyes without blinking. Israel will win." If Israel wins it will be because it has a superb military machine, not because of some hero-worshiping assertion about their attitude towards death.

They are willing to enrage an overwhelmingly powerful opponent. And while their surprise attack succeeded, it was certainly a highly risky move. And then there's that bizarre religious take on things.

Actually, the problem is that the people who voted for tax cuts repeatedly claimed that they would pay for themselves because of the boost they would give to the economy. That was the lie Reagan, Bush, and Trump told.

For what it's worth, which isn't much, Hamas fighters seem to be positively enthusiastic about dying. I suspect the Israeli soldiers have enough sense to be less than enthusiastic about the possible fate.

I'm sure you think you're making a point here. What that point might be is anyone's guess.

Given that my conclusion was " I'd bet that there won't be way less air support." why would you think I was offering this as anything other than an opinion. As for the reserve duty pilots and aircrews, what did their earlier refusal have to do with Israeli policy towards the Palestinians? Wasn't it basically about Natanyahu's and company's plan to defang the Supreme Court? I didn't read much if anything much about Israeli policy towards Palestinians in their protests.

Well, given that Netanyahu and most of the cabinet are political players,and that Israeli Jewish citizens, as opposed to its Arab citizens, are mostly not overly concerned with the fate of the Palestinians in Gaza,, and that it's not just strategic considerations that drive Israel's incursion into Gaza, I'd bet that there won't be way less air support.

Which is why the first 3 friendly witnesses they called on essentially said they've got nothing.

Given the high level of gerrymandering in Republican states democracy is a dubious proposition when it comes to legislation. On the other hand, in those Republican states where the right to an abortion was voted on via referenda, the proposition won every time.

Really? The plan of revenge pursued by Benicio del Toro's character was not the story that shaped the drama? And you're questioning whether or not I saw the film? It is to laugh.

You mean because it was based on narcotics agents' operation instead of the military? You think that's an important point? Or that it was about personal revenge? Weird that you don't understand why what you originally wrote is relevant. It was about a special operation against a drug cartel kingpin inside of Mexico, was it not?

More likely it's what she's basing her plan on.

Your problem with the guy who wanted to send US troops into Mexico to battle the drug cartels is smarminess? Really? Come to think of it, i guess that makes sense from your point of view. Nikki Haley doubles down on promise to send special ops to 'eliminate' drug cartels across US-Mexico border Former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley repeated her support for sending armed forces across the U.S.-Mexico border to target drug cartels. "When it comes to the cartels, we should treat them like the terrorists that they are," Haley told Fox News Digital in a recent interview. "I would send special operations in there and eliminate them just like we eliminated ISIS and make sure that they know there's no place for them." https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nikki-haley-doubles-down-promise-send-special-ops-eliminate-drug-cartels-mexico-border

Especially when the person selected to do the looking into led a company that was fined for defrauding the government. At the time, it was the largest case of health care fraud in U.S. history. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2014/mar/03/florida-democratic-party/rick-scott-rick-scott-oversaw-largest-medicare-fra/

Sorry about the link. Here is it accessible via archive.today. https://archive.ph/JCgaG But I do want to thank you for providing the link to support your contention that "millions of Americans""who are paying more for their health insurance under obamercare than they were before." Oh...wait a minute...you didn't even provide one. If you do provide a link, I'll show you what B.S.it turns out to be.

Actually, while in the original indictment there was no mention of violations concerning classified document, in the superseding indictment there were. A new indictment was filed today in connection with the ongoing prosecution by special counsel Jack Smith of Trump and a top aide, adding charges against the former president for his handling of classified documents after he left the White House. The new, or superseding, indictment also charges Carlos De Oliveira, a maintenance worker at Mar-a-Lago who helped move boxes in of classified documents. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/live-blog/trump-grand-jury-indictment-rcna96233

Did you forget to read the first page? https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/mar-a-lago-affidavit-pdf/5cf823c5850b5e30/full.pdf

1)There is no evidence that Trump declassified the documents. None of his staff are actually backing up his claim. What's more, there is an audiotape of Trump reading from a classified document to an audience of a few people where he specifically says that the document was classified and he couldn't declassify it now because he was no longer President. 2)As for those talks with Trump and his people. At the end of them, Trump's lawyer signed a paper that all the documents had been returned. It was only when NARA got wind of the fact that not only had Trump retained documents, but that some of them were classified did they call in the Justice Dept. 3)And it is false to claim that the entire facility was guarded by the Secret Service. Mar a Lago a glorified country club. Unvetted people were in and out all day long. It's been documented that the documents were left in unguarded locations. The job of the Secret Service is to protect the person of the President and whoever else qualified for such protection. They do not protect the property. Your claim is false. What makes it even worse is that the Secret Service was never advised that there were such documents on the grounds. How would they even knhow to protect such documents if they didn't know that they existed? 4)What you conveniently ignore about Biden's possession of documents is that it has to be shown to be willful. In Trump's case the evidence is overwhelming since he could have been held in violation of the law simply for refusing to return the documents when NARA requested them. Also, the discovery of documents in pl 5)Hillary Clinton did not destroy her server or have it destroyed. As for her phones the issue is a lot more complicated. Here is an explanation. https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-hillary-clinton-hammer-private-email-server-evidence-fbi-1806046 6)As for Clinton sharing classified info with her aides and technicians...even if you had evidence that they weren't cleared to see this information, which seems really unlikely, that a Sec of State's people couldn't view such info. the actions have to be shown to be willful violations of the rules in order to be judged to be criminal. Trump's clearly were willful.

As pointed out previously, the secret service was not of Mar-A-Lago to protect the documents. What's more, it wasn't even notified that there were documents to protect. Not that that would have mattered. And Trump had no right to negotiate the issue of what documents to return. The law very clearly states that a financial archives demands their return that they must be immediately returned. In fact, NARA, was just humoring Trump. After the documents were returned, Trump's legal counsel claimed that none remained in his possession. This was a falsehood. That raises the issue of obstruction of justice.

Anybody with an inkling of understanding of economics knows that the only way you can create widescale deflation is to create a severe recession or depression. And while the measures being discussed can't do much to address the current situation, they're certainly worth exploring should a similar crisis occur in the future.