Patong2021

Couldn't help me. I am so bad, even mini putts present a challenge.

I do get the point. The police showed up on that day, because they knew she would be at home as she had been difficult to contact up to that point. There is no reason to identify a complainant because the action was a public act. There has never been a requirement to have a person complain when there is a threat of an act of violence. If one were to say,"Let's attack the homeless refuge in Bath tonight", there is no requirement for anyone to bring a specific complaint. Nor is it any different when there is an act of vandalism to public property or when uttering threats such as "I will blow up a train station". You claim there is a "non crime". It was not determined at the time. That is why the police were investigating. It is alleged that the person encouraged physical violence against a religious/political group. The law exists because of groups who have in the past organized to attack multiple minority groups. The laws can also be used against the supporters of Hamas who march in the streets of London. Unfortunately, those people enjoy the protection of multiple MPs, student groups, religious activists and labour unions.

Not so fast. Boeing will retain its DEI initiatives. The DEI department was reduced as part of overall cost containment actions at a company in deep financial crisis. The responsibility for DEI is now incorporated in HR activities as opposed to being a stand alone silo. Boeing remains committed to creating a culture of inclusion that attracts and retains the world’s top talent, and inspires every teammate to do their best work and grow their careers. DEI is neither dead nor suspended. It continues. Younger people both expect and demand it. The initial intent of DEI was to ensure that a workplace reflected the local population diversity and was to ensure that competent skilled workers could be recruited and retained. Those goals are still worthwhile. In some companies, there has been an intentional sabotage of the efforts by a vested group of people. There have also been multiple incidents of absolute idiocy by DEI managers who were not properly supervised. The weakness of the DEI in some companies is that the wrong people were hired, in part because the position was not taken seriously. If done right it can make a workplace a better. Unfortunately, DEI is often just for show and provides little benefit to the people it is supposed to help. However, some companies have used their DEI initiatives to attract even better quality people, e.g. Amazon, Intel, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Adidas, Nike, Banks,

Trump's team is brilliant. With Gaetz out of the House, they just got rid of a potential nutjob embarrassing Trump. Sure he is nominated for AG, but it is unlikely he will get the job.

Trump does not want a confirmation hearing. That's the issue of concern for me. The man may or may not be qualified, but his appointment should be subject to a review by the US Senate.Trump does not want anyone asking the man about his plans and qualifications. Secretary of Defense is a CEO type of position and this nominee has no big picture, no multinational management experience or training. The US General staff are well educated and trained. Logistics and management is on a whole different level in the US military. The first duty of the military is to the US Constitution, not to the President.

Fascinating to see the knee jerk reactions from people who do not realize that they have been manipulated. Pearson's right have not been impinged. A complaint was made alleging that Pearson was encouraging physical violence. Under the existing laws, the police are obliged to show that they took the complaint seriously and looked into the matter. The police officers were visiting to ask Pearson if she would attend a voluntary meeting. They were not forcing themselves on her. Because the alleged incident occurred on a media platform open to the general public, the complainant need not be immediately identified as the comment is directed at all and is public. You are upset for the wrong reason. The police are there as agents of the judiciary system. All they were doing was delivering a message, as was their duty and obligation of law enforcement agents. You expect the police to interpret the laws and to do as they wish. That is not appropriate and not how a police system should function. No charges, because there is an ongoing investigation The Crown has the burden of proof to present a viable case. The attackers have offered up excuses and explanations that must be thoroughly investigated and disproven. In the interim, the 4 men were arrested on suspicion of affray and assault and remain on bail subject to conditions. It actually works out better than if they had been to court because 1st time offenders typically get off. Not at all comparable. No one's human rights were abridged. The police officers were visiting to ask if Pearson would agree to a VOLUNTARY meeting. The police had an obligation to respond to an allegation alleging the threat of a physical crime.

Biden maintained the Obama administration position on the pipeline. The pipeline went through environmentally sensitive regions of Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska. A wide coalition of residents were opposed to the pipeline because of the disruption and dangers posed to the water supplies of ranchers, farmers and small towns. Unfortunately, the Canadian pipelines have a bad history of leaks and spills. There is a serious problem of chemical contamination around the oilsands. A large portion of the Canadian financed pipeline would have passed through First Nation/Native lands, over which these people who have sovereignty were mostly opposed. The pipeline would not have benefited US supplies because it was destined to refineries and then for export. I support a pipeline, and am of the view that Canada should have built a refinery in Canada and expanded its pipeline in Canada. Unfortunately, its natives and the province of British Columbia were opposed. I am forever amazed by the double standard of Canadians. They all complain about the cost of gas and are forever going on a holier than thou lecture about environmental responsibility, yet they are big consumers of cheap gasoline and are ok with importing tankers of petroleum from despotic regimes with nary a concern for oil spills and leaks in the oceans or of the environmental cost of extracting and refining overseas in lands where environmental controls are ignored.

Gaetz is disposable and Trump knows it. By suggesting Gaetz, Trump can show that he is open to constructive criticism when the nominee is withdrawn. It is like giving a bone to the dogs. He has rewarded Gaetz and can now say, sorry bub, if you don't get the job, that's on you. If Gatez gets the job, Trump has another lackey. Trump may not have a Senate as easy to push around as hoped. The refusal to accept Scott as Senate leader sent a subtle message. The gloaters here should study history. Nixon was very popular in 1972. He could do no wrong and won a landslide victory. A year later, the press, both Conservative and Moderate had turned on him and he had become a pariah. The 1974 election saw the Democratics roar back taking House and Senate seats from the Republicans. 2 years is a short time and American voters are a angry and resentful.

Total dick move for for show. If he didn't want them to participate he should have not sent anyone in the first place. How did the Argentinian taxpayers save money? The meetings are already underway. The airfares are already paid for as are the hotels. The meals are typically included in the conference fee with meetings and speeches given at mealtimes. The 85 member delegation is not all government officials, because it includes academics and environmental advocates. They all joined together under the Argentinian delegation. I expect that many will remain behind as independent advocates.

This should come as no surprise as multiple police officers have been seen showing favourtism. The issue has long been a source of complaints to various police supervisory units. There are many more constables hired under the "diversity" initiative that require attention.

Yes, the USA imports oil, but it is refined and then sold to third parties at a profit, and is not needed by the USA. The Strategic Reserve is not intended to cover the interruption of these imports. That is not the mandate to the Reserve. How many times do you need to be told that the USA has been energy self sufficient for several years? The Canadian oil & gas industry is foreign dominated with the result that a large portion of Canada's oil production is sent to the US for refining. The US buys cheap oil and then sells an expensive product back to Canadians. This allows the USA to exploit Canadian resources. All of that exported oil is sold going back to Canada at an inflated price. The foreign oil owned interests have acted to prevent the construction of new refineries in Canada for decades.

How am I misinformed? What is your point? You put up a chart with no context. What your chart shows is that oil sales occurred under the Trump administration. The reserve came down in 2023, but is since being added to. Has the SPR not been purchasing oil as of 2023? Try looking at the current data from the US Government not Statista. The US energy Department has purchased oil every month this year. https://www.spr.doe.gov/dir/dir.html Is the USA not energy independent? Isn't the purpose of the reserve to protect against a disruption in energy supplies, primarily from foreign sources? The USA has a 2 year supply. Why do you want the USA to carry a large inventory of oil intended to replace foreign imports when there is no longer the same risk exposure? How do you justify typing up billions of $ in a non performing asset?

The information I referred to was public and released in Biden's health report. (Something Trump won't do.) How do you know he is cognitive decline. G Money asks if you are his personal physician? Yes, I saw the speeches. Biden has a speech impairment. As he has aged, his ability to control the stutter has weakened. This results in pregnant pauses and what look like brain freezes. Speech therapists have already explained that this is common in older people who had severe stutters. It does not mean they have cognitive decline.

So what if deportations were refined during the Obama administration ? The same definition applied to the following Trump administration and Trump deported fewer people. Have you done a cost- benefit analysis of your "strategy"? In order to process people out, you need somewhere to send them. Mexico will not accept the non Mexican nationals. Mexico is now under the control of a left wing activist government. It will most likely not co-operate or assist the USA. How do you propose to send back the millions of Non Mexican nationals if their true nationality cannot be identified or if their homelands will not accept them? There are 1 million people under deportation orders now. They should be the first priority. Finding them and getting rid of them asap. The unauthorized migrants would not be here if business operators and home owners were not hiring and exploiting them. Penalize and fine the people who are using these migrants.

I have a reputable source. His claim does not. What is the source of the data?

And you ignored the reasons for the reserve, how it is used needed and the role that the US Congress has in its control. You dismiss the explanation as BS, and yet you do not even know what the SPR is intended for. Why not educate yourself first? The Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), was established primarily to reduce the impact of disruptions in supplies of petroleum products and to carry out obligations of the United States under the international energy program. It was created at a time when the US was dependent upon foreign petroleum imports. The United States has been an annual net total energy exporter since 2019. This means that the need for a large reserve is not the same as it was 20 years ago. Having a large reserve ties up a significant amount of money. That is why the US Congress in 2015 and since continued, had drawn down on the reserve selling the oil,making a profit. The intent was to replenish the reserve when oil prices were lower. That is exactly what the Biden administration has done. You blame Biden, but the Trump administration had continued the sale of oil reserves too. Why are the sales in the Trump administration acceptable, but not in the Biden administration?

Answer the question. You continually post nonsense. Then when caught, try to distract by going off on a tangent.

No, that is not the issue. What is factually incorrect about the statement; Donald Trump and his transition team are already breaking the law,” Senator Warren wrote. “I would know because I wrote the law. Incoming presidents are required to prevent conflicts of interest and sign an ethics agreement. This is what illegal corruption looks like.”

What was wrong? You have actually agreed with me. In 1993/1994 when his offence occurred, the death penalty was not being used. As I wrote, no prisoners convicted of drug trafficking had been executed since 1989. Yes, someone was executed for murder in 2018, 25 years after the case in question, but it has absolutely no relevance, nor connection to the conditions that were in effect in 1993. Unless, you believe the convicted was a time traveler?

Yes it has. However, the flood victims in NC. the hurricane victims in FL and the people in CA, NY and NJ now contending with horrific wildfires are not likely to deny that the climate change isn't good for them.

What is extremely low? The current inventory is 388.8 MMbl and the trend since April 2023 has been a steady increase in the inventory. The historic high inventories occurred in a time when the USA did not have alternative energy sources such as wind or solar and was more dependent upon imports and inefficient power generation plants. The USA today has a more diverse energy supply. 70% of the US oil production now comes from its Shale fields. 15 years ago Shale oil was still a dream. The need for a large Strategic Oil Reserve is not as pressing as it was 20 years ago. As per the International Energy Agency requirement there is a 90 days of import protection (both public and private stocks) and the USA exceeds this amount. The USA currently has a reserve that exceeds a 2 year demand.

Is what she stated incorrect?

The retail sector has been undergoing change long before Biden or Trump or Obama were in office. Covid simply hastened the change. It is called online shopping and Big Box stores. Many retailers have switched to online retailing. Amazon worldwide annual revenue for 2023 was US $574.785B, a 11.83% increase from 2022. It has a 38% share of the US retail market. It's next largest competitor in the USA is Walmart at 6%. AliBaba, Lazada and Shopee have decimated the retail sector in Asia. All of these retailers grew by taking over retail space previously occupied by bricks and mortar shops. AS the retailers leave the malls, the malls empty out and fail. They are then redeveloped into housing or other types of commercial space like sports facilities.

Nothing wrong in what the PM said. Defence is committed to Australia’s emissions targets of a 43 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030 and net zero by 2050, reinforcing the country’s commitment to the Paris Agreement and global climate leadership. It is a TARGET, not a demand. The underlying reasoning is rational and responsible. Climate change is a national security issue that will increase challenges for Australia, Defence and our region. The challenges arising from climate change are recognised in the National Defence Strategy and Defence is taking action. Action on climate change is part of the Defence mission to defend Australia and its national interests. Effective action will advance Australia’s security and prosperity. The Australian Defence Force will work to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and to mitigate the impacts of climate change. Defence will take a sensible and practical approach to adopting renewable energy for use in its deployable capabilities. Nothing wrong in being energy independent. The average share of renewables in Australia’s main grid is around 40 per cent. In Western Australia, which is an isolated grid not connected to another state, the peak share of wind and solar was 84 per cent. And in South Australia, when the state was electrically isolated from the rest of the grid, the peak share of wind and solar was 91.5 per cent, which shows that energy independence is viable. It is unlikely Australia will ever be independent of gas fired or coal fired electricity generation, but it can certainly reduce the dependence upon these polluters especially the dirty coal.

Most of the independent schools have obtained a "Charity" designation. As I understand this status, it allows for a reduced tax rate from the local council, and allows for additional tax deductions and credits available to charities. I have seen references to the benefit of charity status as £200 per pupil. If there are an 554,000 pupils at independent schools, the amount of tax revenue forsaken would be £200 X 554,000 = £1,108,000,000. There are also additional amounts lost to the Revenue department, of which I have seen estimates of between £100 million and £200 million. (I am unable to find a reliable source for this, so take it under advise.) No. A quick check of Google says that the average tuition per pupil is £16,656.00 If we use 554,000 pupils, the total taxable amount is £9,227,424,000.00 20% of that is £1,845,484,800.00 If we look at the numbers from the first answer above, it gives the impression that the government is collecting revenue it has previously not collected because of the schools' charitable status. In effect a wash. Comment The parents who are sending their children to independent schools are also paying taxes to support the government school system, but they receive no service or benefit from that tax contribution. At the very least, they should be able to receive a tax credit for this.