gearhog

How are they disadvantaged/persecuted? If the DoD has official programs to recruit, retain, and promote certain groups over another, is that not an advantage? Check out the Joint Base Langley-Eustis website. https://www.jble.af.mil/Resources/Breaking-Barriers-Alliance-BBA-/ Air Force Money and manpower are being expended to promote and host several events over the course of an entire month to promote one group over another. That's persecution? https://twitter.com/usairforce/status/1666491502426480642?s=20 Is that persecution? If someone disagrees with your opinion on tolerance, they're just an asshole. Can you spot the irony? When you say you have a lot of recent first hand experience with the issue, what specifically do you mean? I mean no disrespect or ill-intent, but it does beg the question: Are you a member of the LGBTQ community? If so, that would help in understanding your position.

(Most) people will live up to, or down to, the generally accepted standards set for them. If it is someone's personal policy to accept people how they are with no qualifications, they effectively have no standards or expectations. Do you not have any measures of acceptable behavior for the people you surround yourself with? If a person is willing to tolerate absolutely anything, their opinion is literally of no consequence, and they render themselves an ineffectual. Ineffectuals are currently being railroaded. "Give an inch, they take a mile". I would agree that people should be free to make any decision for themselves that does not adversely affect others. But I need not condone or endorse it nor should I be censored for speaking against it. Granting an advantage to someone on the basis of gender identity adversely effects those who aren't obsessed with this latest trend. And one would have to be blind to not see the physical harm being done to young people, and the indescribable harm that is to come to them should society as whole continue accept anyone "as they are".

"And those who identify as such..." Does the DoD have a list of qualifying criteria for gender identification? Personal morality notwithstanding, why would anyone not identify as (whatever) in order to be given all the protection, preferential treatment, and elevated status the DoD is pushing if the qualifying criteria to do so is individually subjective? Then at the end of one's service, "they" could claim gender dysphoria as a service connected disability. There would be no downside apart from the shame, loss of dignity, and reputation for being human trash, which is no longer a deterrent for many, and often a prerequisite for leadership selection.

Russian propaganda warning. https://www.tijd.be/politiek-economie/belgie/algemeen/cia-meldde-belgie-dat-oekraine-wellicht-nord-stream-saboteerde/10473737.html

https://twitter.com/ricwe123/status/1662190322468700170?s=20

With this latest whistleblower, I estimate that there have been 69 million allegations and speculations from people "in the know" about the existence of aliens and alien craft. Yet not one single, solitary shred of proof in a time where our highest leadership stores top secret documents in closets, garages, and home offices. That's some amazing infosec.

Just in 2 months, several more countries are cozing up to China economically. Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Kenya, etc... Today, Brazil president visits China. Calls to end Dollar dominance. https://www.ft.com/content/669260a5-82a5-4e7a-9bbf-4f41c54a6143 France. Macron recently visited China. Encourages Europe to associations with US. “The paradox would be that, overcome with panic, we believe we are just America’s followers,” Macron said in the interview. “The question Europeans need to answer … is it in our interest to accelerate [a crisis] on Taiwan? No. The worse thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the U.S. agenda and a Chinese overreaction,” he said. https://www.politico.eu/article/emmanuel-macron-china-america-pressure-interview/ The world is changing, and not in our favor.

https://twitter.com/NATO/status/1628687961477750790?s=20

Pay attention. There will be more stories like this if we don't fix our shit. https://www.reuters.com/markets/currencies/china-says-it-will-set-up-yuan-clearing-arrangements-brazil-2023-02-07/ https://thecradle.co/article-view/21245/the-big-stiff-russia-iran-dump-the-dollar-and-bust-us-sanctions

Let me know if you find one. I'm not sympathetic to Russia. I don't care about nor have any interest in Russia. I hope their political system fails. I'm concerned about holding my own country to account and ensure that we maintain some semblance of being an objective force for good, and not lies, deceit, and corruption like the govt we're funding. So you're just going to completely ignore my questions about what Russian influence you're concerned about? I wonder why. LOL. Oh really? I immediately thought of this when I read that. I'm not just creating these concerns out of thin air. I've done a little research before I've decided if my concerns were worth having. If anyone bothered to look at what occurred in Ukraine around 2014, this current crisis is not some noble endeavor to spread freedom and democracy. Around that time, Ukraine was being offered trade and economic incentives by the EU. Russia countered with an economic package of their own. President Yanukovych, who was elected in large part by Eastern Ukrainians who align with Russia. He began to indicate he favored the Russian deal. Obviously, this would mean a major loss to the EU and the US as they were counting on the economic and energy resources a country like Ukraine would bring to the struggling EU. Yanukovich had also signed a long term Sevastopol Naval Base lease with Russia. None of this good for the West. Coincidentally around that time, pro-EU and Western Ukrainian nationalist protests broke out. They became violent and a coup took place. There were attacks on the LDPR aligned Ukrainians in the East by nationalist forces from the West. Poroshenko was installed and Eastern Ukraine was threatened with being barred from participation in elections. He also began negotiations with the West to remove the LDPR, terminate the Sevastopol naval base lease and lease it to NATO. Russia said "No." Invaded and took Crimea without firing a shot. Russia was assisting LDPR in the east. They won battles against the Western Ukr. Then the UNSC sactioned Minsk agreements were to give LDPR autonomy, create a ceasefire, and remove foreign assistance from both sides. But those agreements were not adhered to, likely by either side. Conflict continued and a stalemate ensued. The West was getting impatient. In early 2021, Ukraine nationalists had a massive mobilization on the contact lines to take Eastern LDPR territories by force. They were receiving help from the US and NATO. Russia viewed this as a further expansion of NATO and began building forces on the border with Ukraine. You know the rest. Uh.. yeah. Exactly. We shouldn't have been incurring any of these costs. If NATO didn't fund a Ukrainian civil war and the installation of a pro-Western government hell bent on NATO membership, none of those families and soldiers would have been apart, and we'd have saved billions.

It's still spending. What Russian influence? What were they influencing that you are so concerned about? Were you worried that they may be experiencing economic growth by exporting resources from their own patch of dirt? Were they interfering in our elections resulting in fraudulent outcomes? Were they parking missiles just outside the borders of the US? As someone has said before, they're spinning their wheels in the mud fighting the poorest and most corrupt country in Europe...and you fear them enough to sell out your financial future? We spend billions on deployments, so what's a few tens of billions more? I don't understand how that makes sense to you when you're trying to assuage anyone's concerns about spending.

I'll give you a B- for effort, but the content is rambling, disjointed, and non-coherent. I'm glad you're trying to explain your position as I suggested, but it kinda sucks. No one is going to read what you wrote and come away with a clear understanding what your primary argument is. If you have a question about my position or want me to clarify something you didn't like, I am more than happy to give you an honest answer, but I honestly can't quite make out what you're whining about. Are you just mad about my very plain and easy to understand argument that I don't want us sending hundreds of billions we don't have, to escalate a conflict that costs us more than it helps us, just to expand access to wealth and resources by fighting an over-hyped boogeyman? Fine. Go ahead, be mad about. It doesn't change anything. Try posting some links, news articles, or opinions from someone who actually knows how to write. Maybe we can have rational debate over them. Otherwise, you'll just continue to repeat yourself and your poor opinion of me. No one cares about that. Me least of all.

Maryland Senator submits bill make the age of consent to vaccination 14 years old, without parents' permission. However... if the parent desires the child be vaccinated, the 14 year old child cannot refuse. Sort of has an evil vibe to it. https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2023RS/bills/sb/sb0378f.pdf

Exactly. It's just censorship. Some here believe they're smart enough to know misinformation when they see it, but large swaths of the public are not. Lawman thinks he is protecting people from scary ideas by silencing the idea rather than educating the reader. The only correct responses to bad ideas are good ideas. If you are able to adequately articulate and support your superior position, my position wouldn't even garner an acknowledgement. However, when another position has merit, it is a threat. If your motive is to "Win" rather than find the truth, you have to attempt to censor the opposing argument. "Shut up", "Stop spreading misinformation", "You should be silenced.", "You're peddling a pro-Russian narrative.", "I'm going to find your IP address and dox you." Those are examples of attempted censorship, I'm not quoting anyone. Lawman is slowly embodying the very things he hates about Russia. You may only speak the government approved narrative, lest ye be guilty of crimes against the state. I asked earlier in this thread, "How can so many have been fooled into supporting tyrannical leadership?" It's rhetorical because it's obvious how. @Lawman when you were googling the logical fallacies I clued you into, did you run across "Ad hominen"? It's commonly used to mean attacking the person, not the issue. But it can also mean attacking the source, not the information. If you really want to be competitive in the battleground of ideas, you're going to have to do a little better by coming well equipped to explain why you're correct rather than taking the easy route and just calling any of us who disagree pro-Russian.

You're flailing, my friend. It's embarrassing to watch.

Right. I should have said I paid a higher amount of taxes, not a higher tax rate.

@Lawman, I found your taxes. If you got your shot, don't watch this. I don't want a stroke on my conscience.

You want a moderator to run my IP address? For what? Retaliation for disagreeing with you? Go ahead. You gonna show up in your knee high boots and arrest me for making statements against the state? This is like some sort of 1984/Gulag Archipelago type stuff, man. You're losing your mind over this. Take a break, brother.

"Ukrainian purity" You can't be serious. https://www.euronews.com/2023/01/24/ukraine-corruption-scandal-string-of-officials-resign-in-kyiv The United States vowed to tightly monitor how Ukraine spends billions of dollars of aid on Tuesday, following a damaging corruption scandal that led to a string of resignations in Kyiv. While Washington said it had no evidence western funds were being misused, US State Department Spokesman Ned Price promised there would be "rigorous monitoring" to ensure American assistance was not diverted. Several senior Ukrainian officials were dismissed on Tuesday, in the wake of a corruption scandal surrounding illicit payments to deputy ministers and over-inflated military contracts. A total of five regional governors, four deputy ministers and two heads of a government agency left their posts, alongside the deputy head of the presidential administration and the deputy attorney general. In his nightly address, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the purge was "necessary" to maintain "a strong state", while Price hailed it as "quick" and "essential". Still, the scandal comes at a sensitive time for Kyiv, as it asks for ever-increasing amounts of support from the West and faces down Russian advances in the east. Corruption could dampen Western enthusiasm for the Ukrainian government, which has a long history of shaky governance. EDIT: @Lawman, one more for your consideration. Just got my W-2s the other day and I paid the highest taxes I've ever paid in my life, by a lot. I hope you did, too. We should all be concerned where they're going. I'm never going to apologize for my concerns. https://www.kyivpost.com/post/6880

How am I adopting the "No True Scotsman" position? I am amused that you actually googled "logical fallacies", randomly selected one that's irrelevant, and hoped it would kind of work to make it seem like you kind of knew what you're talking about. Explain how my position in any way relates to it. I'll wait. Are you really accusing me of doubting Ukrainian purity? Is that a joke? And once again, like clockwork, you get a little flustered and regress into the insults and name calling. Didn't see that one coming a mile away. LOL

You're still calling it wild bullshit. I don't get it? Is the video of Biden saying he will bring an end to the pipeline fake? If you cannot see the video or do not trust any of the sources, I can get you another source. Perhaps you will find this sufficient: This is the official White House Transcript. Once again, is this bullshit? Please answer. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/02/07/remarks-by-president-biden-and-chancellor-scholz-of-the-federal-republic-of-germany-at-press-conference/ (Speaks German.) (As interpreted.) If I may ask you, Chancellor Scholz — you said there was some strategic ambiguity that was needed in terms of sanctions. I just wanted to know whether the sanctions you are envisaging and the EU is working on — and the U.S. as well — are already finished, finalized, or is there still work ongoing? And you’re not really saying what the details are. Is that just an excuse for Germany, maybe, to not support the SWIFT measures? PRESIDENT BIDEN: The first question first. If Germany — if Russia invades — that means tanks or troops crossing the — the border of Ukraine again — then there will be — we — there will be no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it. Q But how will you — how will you do that exactly, since the project and control of the project is within Germany’s control? PRESIDENT BIDEN: We will — I promise you, we’ll be able to do it. CHANCELLOR SCHOLZ: (As interpreted.) Thank you very much for your question. I want to be absolutely clear: We have intensively prepared everything to be ready with the necessary sanctions if there is a military aggression against Ukraine. And this is necessary. It is necessary that we do this in advance so that Russia can clearly understand that these are far-reaching, severe measures. It is part of this process that we do not spell out everything in public because Russia could understand that there might be even more to come. And, at the same time, it is very clear we are well prepared with far-reaching measures. We will take these measures together with our Allies, with our partners, with the U.S., and we will take all necessary steps. You can be sure that there won’t be any measures in which we have a differing approach. We will act together jointly. (Speaks in English.) And possibly this is a good idea to say to our American friends: We will be united, we will act together, and we will take all the necessary steps. And all the necessary steps will be done by all of us together. Q And will you commit today — will you commit today to turning off and pulling the plug on Nord Stream 2? You didn’t mention it, and you haven’t mentioned it. CHANCELLOR SCHOLZ: As I’ve already said, we are acting together, we are absolutely united, and we will not be taking different steps. We will do the same steps, and they will be very, very hard to Russia, and they should understand.

Bullshit? I just searched for "Biden Nordstream" and that was one of the first results. I posted it because it was vertically oriented and had subtitles. I did change it because I didn't notice the handle. The poster is probably a little sketch. Maybe this one will work better for you. Is it BS too? Yahoo Finance. I have a couple dozen links. I can likely get whichever source you trust. Just let me know.

https://twitter.com/Edwin07011/status/1623364307818844180?s=20&t=3ZTV3B263sNEWXTdhSkKAw

You're losing the argument so instead of pointing to evidence where I've ever said such things when I challenged you, your basis is now "You're thinking it, but not saying it." Falling back to that reasoning is childish. But I guess in your mind, it works. You can literally accuse me of anything and then say "Liar. You're really a communist." Thank you, Senator John McCarthy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism Again, you don't have anything at all to legitimately criticize so you resort, as usual, to making things up. I have said time and again that I want Russia to fail. Search my post history. You'll find it. But what I don't want it to lose the principles that made America great in the process. You seem to be willing to accept "skeletons", to excuse criminal behavior, to rationalize and justify any act that harms Russia. That's a Pyrrhic victory. You may be satisfied with one, but I'm not. Everything you don't like is Russian I/O, but I'm the conspiracy theorist. Roger.