Slashdot Mirror
New Yorkers Sue Trump and FEMA To Stop Presidential Alert (cnet.com)
Not everyone is pleased to hear that President Trump has the power to use communications systems in case of an emergency. According to CNET, three New York residents recently filed a lawsuit against President Trump and William Long, administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to halt FEMA's new Presidential Alert messaging system.
The lawsuit reads in part: "Plaintiffs are American citizens who do not wish to receive text messages, or messages of any kind, on any topic or subject, from defendant Trump. [Trump's] rise to power was facilitated by weaponized disinformation that he broadcast into the public information sphere via Twitter in addition to traditional mass media." From the report: Presidential Alerts are similar to Amber or other emergency alerts on your phone -- you hear a loud noise comes along with vibration. The messages come from the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS), which attempts to send the alert to every cell phone within the U.S. operating on a network run by a carrier opting into the Wireless Emergency Alert system. IPAWS is used in the event of natural disasters, acts of terrorism or other disasters or threats to public safety. The plaintiffs' main complaint is that Presidential Alerts are compulsory -- there's no way to opt-out of receiving them. They argue that under civil rights law, government cannot use cellular devices to compel listening, "trespass into and hijack" devices without a warrant or individual consent.
The plaintiffs are also concerned Trump might use the alerts to spread disinformation because IPAWS doesn't regulate the content of the messages. That means Trump may be free to define "act of terrorism" and "threat to public safety," and may broadcast "arbitrary, biased, irrational" messages to "hundreds of millions of people," the plaintiffs say in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit reads in part: "Plaintiffs are American citizens who do not wish to receive text messages, or messages of any kind, on any topic or subject, from defendant Trump. [Trump's] rise to power was facilitated by weaponized disinformation that he broadcast into the public information sphere via Twitter in addition to traditional mass media." From the report: Presidential Alerts are similar to Amber or other emergency alerts on your phone -- you hear a loud noise comes along with vibration. The messages come from the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS), which attempts to send the alert to every cell phone within the U.S. operating on a network run by a carrier opting into the Wireless Emergency Alert system. IPAWS is used in the event of natural disasters, acts of terrorism or other disasters or threats to public safety. The plaintiffs' main complaint is that Presidential Alerts are compulsory -- there's no way to opt-out of receiving them. They argue that under civil rights law, government cannot use cellular devices to compel listening, "trespass into and hijack" devices without a warrant or individual consent.
The plaintiffs are also concerned Trump might use the alerts to spread disinformation because IPAWS doesn't regulate the content of the messages. That means Trump may be free to define "act of terrorism" and "threat to public safety," and may broadcast "arbitrary, biased, irrational" messages to "hundreds of millions of people," the plaintiffs say in the lawsuit.
how clueless, President Barack Obama signed the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System Modernization Act of 2015.
And the messages are from FEMA.
Beside this fools in major media outlets are embarrassing themselves with their ignorance, spewing about "Trump's messages"
...because it is idiotic, and could apply to EAS, or EBS before it, delivered via any medium, including radio and TV, or even warning sirens.
https://nypost.com/2018/10/03/...
One of the chief purposes and reasons for being for EAS (and EBS) is for the President to get a message directly to the American people in the event of a major national emergency.
It's a system that is desperately needed, and was expanded to include Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) via the IPAWS legislation signed into law by President Obama.
And though we hope the system is never used, it does need to be tested.
https://slate.com/technology/2...
The plaintiffs are also concerned Trump might use the alerts to spread disinformation because IPAWS doesn't regulate the content of the messages. That means Trump may be free to define "act of terrorism" and "threat to public safety," and may broadcast "arbitrary, biased, irrational" messages to "hundreds of millions of people," the plaintiffs say in the lawsuit.
I think the plaintiffs should have to present some evidence why they believe it is likely the President would abuse this forum to broadcast "arbitrary, biased, irrational" messages.
To what individual tendency they'd even reference?
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
The messages are free, so there are no damages.
I want to know why alerts don't go into a history like text messages. Personally I think they should just go into the normal SMS history.
When I clear an alert to make the phone be quiet I lose the ability to see the alert. That's some of the dumbest planning I've seen.
I refuse to sign
...you guys are still butt hurt over the 2016 election.
But really, you don't want FEMA messages because they "come from Trump"? You know this system was authorized by President Obama, right?
-Styopa
Yeah, no shit. I recall this being set up during the Obama Administration, and I also remember how badly it failed due to problems integrating it into the larger national alert system.
IANAL -- First, you can sue anyone over just about anything. Never, ever ignore a lawsuit, always respond to court complaints otherwise you will probably lose automatically if you don't show up. It's no guarantee that you will win with silly claims, and the judge might charge you a lot of money for wasting the court's time, but you can at least try to file it.
But that's probably not your question, it's probably "can someone successfully sue you for something that you haven't yet done?". So next, you're supposed to have a tort to be able to file a lawsuit, that is to say you must have at least suffered some kind of injury. If you haven't actually done anything wrong, but you might in the future, they likely can't sue you successfully. In this case, someone might be able to get an injunction against some kind of severely harmful behavior, but the person filing the lawsuit typically has a high burden of proof to show that you will actually do the thing in the future.
The original bill that created this national FEMA alert was passed in 2006. Bush then signed a bill that modified it in 2008. The original test was scheduled to happen during the hurricane Florence. So it was moved to today. Just another opportunity to smear Trump.
Anyone? Anyone? The F?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
This is so butthurt, stupid, and such a waste of effort and thought. It's perfect for the millennial snowflake crowd. It let's them signal virtue with no effort, and while accomplishing nothing at all of value.
In fact it's basically:
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Sure - after all, you can make stuff up (where every single one of your "witnesses" you named all completely deny your claim) about something that happened 36 years ago and has zero proof and demand that others lose their job because of it.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
> [Trump's] rise to power was facilitated by weaponized disinformation that he broadcast into the public information sphere via Twitter in addition to traditional mass media.
This is rich considering the objectively lopsided reporting by the media who did their best to elect Hillary. You can't complain about Russian trolls when you have the power of mass media and tech companies behind you.
Amazingly they still don't understand why Trump won. The fact is, Hillary was an awful candidate, and no propping her up by the powerful elites was going to change that.
Look, I hate Trump probably as much as anyone. But this lawsuit is dumb.
It's just an emergency alert. The weather service can issue weather alerts, emergency services can issue alerts for wildfires and earthquakes and such. They're an obvious public good - informing the public of imminent dangers to life and limb.
Could it be abused? In theory, yeah. Not quite sure how you'd do it in practice - it's not like there's a special console in the Oval Office that controls it, any message has to pass through lines of people before it goes out, any one of which would be required to refuse it. I'd be more worried about some FEMA staffer accidentally running something in prod instead of test and spamming the country than the Tangerine Toddler using it as an unblockable twitter.
More to the point, if you're worried that the President is likely to abuse a top-level emergency warning system to shovel propaganda at an unwilling public... the solution is not "don't let the president do that", it's "don't let that person be president". Such an untrustworthy person should not have been elected in the first place, and such a breach of public trust is cause for immediate removal from office, whether by impeachment or 25A or any other means necessary.
After all, we trust the president with nukes. If we can't trust someone with an emergency broadcast system, how the hell can we trust them with thermonuclear weapons?
"Presidential" alerts actually go back to the 1960s when people were afraid of nuclear attack by Russia. It gave the president (Kennedy) the power to alert Americans "We are under attack. Held to your shelters."
Fast-forward to now, it's still the same system to provide Fast warning to the citizens, but expanded from TV and radio to include cellphones.
Big deal.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Grow the fuck up. It's the Presidential Alert system, and only for the brief moment is The Trumenfuhrer occupying that seat. Someone else will be President soon enough and we can all luxuriate again in alerts about how many billions of dollars we're shipping in the middle of the night to terrorist supporters.
They do on my phone (Galaxy). Maybe you just have a cappy phone.
I truly believe this is a frivolous lawsuit. Yeah.... it might be abused. But that isn't a good reason to not have the alert system.
If I were a judge I'd tell them to come back after its been mis-used at least once. Then offer injunctive relief... not before.
FD
Sadly, no current party properly represents me. I am neither aligned with the Party of Lord Donald, nor the Clinton's political affiliation. I believe a candidate for office chooses a political side too often based on electability. Dems don't win in Texas (sorry, Beto) and Conservatives don't serve in Vermont (you know I'm right, Bernie.
There are certainly women who've been taken advantage of by powerful men, and not so powerful men, for aeons.
There are just as certainly, clever and unscrupulous modern women who will weaponize the movement. The benefit of the doubt to me-too-ers should absolutely be given, but in the court of law rather than the court of public opinion.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
And when it was signed into law under Obama, I think I remember the Republican-leaning part of the population being equally outraged at it.
This "we must be outraged *just* because Trump was named in describing the thing" feels just as bad as "we must be outraged *just* because Obama was named in describing the thing" from a few years ago. The only thing that's changed is who is being outraged.
(Sure, this administration may be saying/doing a lot of things there's a real non-partisan reason to be outraged at, but this isn't one of them.)
Such a misguided idea connecting safety alerts to the president.
Yep, it's mostly a marketing failure... I mean even the official site says:
What alerts does WEA deliver?
Alerts from WEA cover only critical emergency situations. Consumers may receive only three types of alerts:
Alerts issued by the President
Alerts involving imminent threats to safety or life
Amber Alerts
Participating carriers may allow subscribers to block all but Presidential alerts.
I mean it is natural that it's the President addressing the country in a crisis, but they could have just called it "National Security alerts" for example. Like you can't opt out of the warning that WWIII just started. It's kinda hard for me to think of a "critical emergency" that doesn't fit any of those three.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Don't like it? Don't use it. Speak with your wallet.
This was no more invasive than the Amber alert for kidnapped children. I've gotten those at 4:30 AM, talk about invasive. I don't remember any lawsuits being filed on them.
This comes from sour losers who don't like the President. If in fact a catastrophic event occurs and the President was not allowed to use the system, those same sons of bitches will whine "Why didn't the administration warn us?". Making speculation that the President will use the system to send irrational/biased messages is just plain stupid!!! He gets to say whatever he wants on his own twitter account but he will definitely be removed from office if he uses it to further his agenda.
It goes into the history on my Windows Phone :D
Now I'm curious what brand phone you have. Sounds poorly designed.
Freaked the shit out of people for a few seconds. Thousands of phones went off at once in a very busy airport, a few people sought cover/shelter.
Now I expect regular Tweets but not via Twitter...
BlameBillCosby.com
They are buried to be sure, but on my Android Pixel 2 running 9.0 Pie I can find them here:
Apps & Notifications -> Emergency Alerts -> Emergency alert history
Of course they do ...
And these are the folks who think they are smarter than us dumb flyover hicks.
If things don't go Trump's want he likely will start an uprising against the United States.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
'nuff said.
Sure - after all, you can make stuff up (where every single one of your "witnesses" you named all completely deny your claim) about something that happened 36 years ago and has zero proof and demand that others lose their job because of it.
You can also, as amply demonstrated by yourself, falsely claim that any witnesses at all(let alone every one of them) refute and deny claims even as what they really said is that they don't remember any specific incidents but are quite sure that there were examples of drinking to excess and if you scream loudly and belligerently enough all of your partisan zealots (such as yourself) will defend you like blind fanatics who are more concerned with sympathy towards the self-professed indignity that anybody dares question your fitness for a job that you aren't fit to hold.
Let's face it, if you could defend Kavanaugh's character, you wouldn't have to go to such lengths to avoid admitting he was a drunken party boy.
I would be totally onboard with this if they added a Reply button and now that I think about it, a Reply to All button would be even better.
??? Testing a new system before it is needed is pretty standard. Not sure Iâ(TM)d call it abuse..., Dems on a hair trigger and disgusted before they even know why theyâ(TM)re upset.
Well they haven't made Windows Phones in quite a while so...
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
It's sad that people even give a flying fuck about this message. Oh, test message. Not an Amber Alert, no hurricane or earthquake.
The EAS has messages at least once a week on your favorite radio station. No one gets outraged. Same principal.
The electronic trespass rubric seems like a sham to me. If there were a tornado coming through, you'd want to know. A national emergency like some fool N Korean lobbing stuff at the USA, yeah, a real one (not the stupid fake one of recent memory) is important.
Gonna be earthquake? Sunspots of biblical magnitude (just before most transistors get clobbered) would be nice. I'd break out the candles.
Of many things to give a crap about, this is not one of them.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Yep. Heard the stories. That your nerd ass friends made up. Because you weren't there. Probably because even then the well adjusted kids had you pegged as a frothing lunatic; probably were worried about you shootin up the place hey sport?
Society no longer cares "what someone has done" the emphasis is now on "what someone may do". It's the perfect way to get around the whole pesky right of being "innocent until proven guilty". Either everyone is entitled to constitutional protections or no one is. There is no middle ground in this decision.
That humans have run their course, time to give the dinosaurs another chance...
And the same outraged people would be outraged again if some disaster stuck and they weren't notified.
"Why didn't the government warn us?? WHYYYY!?"
And when it was signed into law under Obama, I think I remember the Republican-leaning part of the population being equally outraged at it.
Really? I don't remember any outrage about it at all. It was an extension/upgrade to the existing EAS system and back then people understood that a notification system was a Good Thing. Of course there were people who don't want to get any messages they don't want, like the presidential alert, and are unhappy that there is no way to turn them off. (I am one of those.) It's hardly "outrage" at "Obama" or "Trump" to feel that way. I feel the same way about useless Amber alerts, and even the Everbridge calls that our local Sheriff's office sometimes send out.
The only thing that's changed is who is being outraged.
No. There were no lawsuits from morons who wanted to predict all kinds of nonsense about how it would be misused when it was created. This is a lawsuit that is many years too late, because nothing has changed about the system itself. It's only who is now authorized to send the message, and that message is not coming straight from the cellphone of the President, it's coming through FEMA.
This lawsuit nonsense is a whole 'nother level of derangement. No, Trump is not going to declare a national emergency just so he can trigger a national alert. It just ain't gonna happen.
Exactly.
These days, half the people are raging that it's sun-up, while the others wondered why couldn't night time be longer.
If there was a concerted effort to make everyone touchy MFers, it worked.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
So all these net neutrality lawsuits are pointless?
The idea is older than that. The extension of EAS to cell phones was publicly announced in 2009 (prior to Obama) - http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs... but the actual order to FCC was given in 2006.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Dying in a flash flood to own the GOP means we don't have to deal with your dumb ass anymore.
This group of people want to avoid "arbitrary, biased, irrational" messages by filing an arbitrary, biased, irrational lawsuit.
Seriously.. you were in a conference call.. as were your audience members and *nobody* got the memo? It was delayed two weeks because of the impact of Hurricane Florence. After that delay it was advertised to world+dog that it would happen at 1818 Zulu time on 10/3. So with all of that notice you have the audacity to bitch about it being inconvenient? By your own words you decided to turn off your own phone so you didn't get the alert. That is your choice as it was a test... but the idea of a test is to see if the target audience receives the information. By turning off your phone you decided to avoid being informed if you could be notified of something going terribly wrong.. that you should know about.. like 9/11. It seems you and those like you don't want to be informed when it goes all SHTF because it is inconvenient for your meeting?
I have a great idea for you as it will make your life less loud which seems your end-goal. Move to the Midwest of America (assuming you live in America). Cell coverage in many areas is sketchy so you don't have to worry about a test of a nationwide notification system. Every day of your life... insert an NRR earplug in both ears that will prevent you from hearing either your cell phone's nationwide alert... or more appropriately the blaring sirens when an F-rated tornado approaches your town. That way you don't have to worry about being inconvenienced while you are in a telecon and the other members don't have to worry when they hear the click and the dial-tone when you leave the meeting unexpectedly.
Yeah. Call them "FEMA Alerts" or "National Emergency Alerts" instead. This is not something you want tied to anything political.
Those that dislike the current President will be annoyed by the message. And the next time there's a Democratic president, Trump's fans will be annoyed by the message.
So your suggestion is that the most critical of emergency broadcasts should be more subtle, so as not to disturb any meetings?
Yes, I understand that the carriers can't ensure that these alerts are received at exactly the same time. Yes, I understand that there may be a legitimate need for them, and in an emergency, it can be critical. But the implementation leaves much to be desired. It doesn't need to be as disruptive as it is; it doesn't need to be as obnoxious as they are.
If you actually understood the need you'd know why they have to be as disruptive and obnoxious as they are. The system isn't designed to be delivering messages like "sorry to bother you, if you aren't busy or otherwise occupied, but here is a bit of information you might find interesting..." It's intended for a message that is critical enough that you need to stop what you are doing and listen.
We've never had one -- yet -- but when we need it it needs to be there and noticed. What would it be used for? Well, I can't predict all the messages it could convey, but one easy guess is a nuclear attack. Not a "bombs have fallen on cities", but a warning saying that warheads are on the way to conduct an EMP attack. If you know NOW that in 10 minutes there will be a series of EMP pulses, you have some ability to turn off and disconnect things to protect them. I've seen the predictions (both Russian and US) for EMP damage and a single warhead over Kansas will damage a LOT of electronic stuff, both through direct pulse and through induced power and phone line voltages. Ten minutes could mean a lot of damage prevented.
in an age where everyone has them glued to their hand, where we scarcely pass a few minutes without checking them, it is not necessary nor desirable to have a mandatory alert wailing at full volume, because people already devote a lot of attention to their phones.
You might find it interesting to know that not everyone has their phone glued to their hand with sound turned on 24/7. Some of us keep the sound off ALL THE TIME unless we're actually listening to something (podcast, etc.), and sometimes the phone will be on the other side of the house. E.g., when I get up to go to the bathroom in the middle of the night I never take my phone with me, and I may wind up in the kitchen getting something to drink. I have gotten texts that I don't see until the next day, and "missed call" notices the same way. I don't want to be bothered with run of the mill SMS and calls, but I would really like to know when unplugging stuff would be a really good idea.
I'm sorry you were so annoyed that it was tested once in the dozen of years it has been in place.
For one data point, I did not get any notification on my cell. T-Mobile.
That's right. They are not the same. Few people had Obama Derangement Syndrome compared to tens of millions with TDS. But this madness is not over, it needs to play out further. It's going to be a neurotic society's Primal Scream.
Sue to keep it OFF until trump is replaced by a democrat in 2024.
I guess word WILL break this ones bones.
>"The electronic trespass rubric seems like a sham to me. If there were a tornado coming through, you'd want to know"
Indeed. Too bad every one of those tornado alerts I got were hundreds of miles away from me and always at some insane time, and with an EXTREMELY loud and frightening alarm. And so I turned that portion off. Don't even get me started about "amber alerts"...
And yet we are not "allowed" to turn off "Presidential Alerts"
The real issue here is one of principle. I don't think the government- ANY BRANCH OR ANY ONE in the government should have the "right" to force message me on my personal mobile phone. I think they have clear cause to put such a system together. And it should be tested. I even think it is a good idea to have it "enabled" by default. But *I*, as the owner of the device, should have the right to turn off that alert on *MY* phone if I so choose. That is the enraging part. For me (and I suppose many others) it has nothing to do with stupid politics. It is about freedom and the right to control my own devices. And yes, I would leave such an alert enabled.
It's not a new system, they're just butthurt that it works.
How can you be sure? He's known for doing or saying whatever just to get what he wants.
Although I truly and sincerely desire you to have control over your devices and your privacy, you and I do not.
Could the alerts be tighter? Sure. I get Amber alerts from 200mi away. I shrug. You should, too.
You are mightily deceived if you don't understand privacy, LBS tracking, and the sins of the telcos. This is truly chump change compared to the flapping pile of data dirt already stored on you, and I. Living in a crazy world is a grey scale of death by a thousand cuts. This is just one cut. Save the cries for the really deep ones.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
I don't trust the current guy, but this is just a tiny dick move among dick moves that are clearly gargantuan. It's a matter of penises. He wants to have a big one, and now, he thinks he does, especially when people complain loudly and severely.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Really? Then why has the current disruptive obnoxious usage been used to report things like heavy rain conditions? That's hardly "world war 3" levels of criticality.
And it wasn't a problem in that naive age when we could still held the innocent belief that all Presidents could at least be expected to be Presidential in their behavior.
Donald Trump did NOT dream up this alert system!
A Whole raft of things like this started to be formulated 17 years ago in response to 9-11. This one is not (formally) that old (Obama signed it) but the idea that the nation needed to workout a nationwide cellphone based alert system to inform the public during national emergencies (like 9-11 when ALL air traffic in the entire nation were suddenly grounded) to inform the public in extraordinary situations was discussed. Back in the early years of the Cold War, there was an alert system that was created to use radio and TV, but now almost everybody uses cell phones and many do not even use TV, so an update was clearly needed.
Contrary to the garbage swirling in some "progressive" circles today, Trump is not doing this to prepare to eliminate the congress and courts and take the nation into fascist dictatorship. Put the foil hats away. There are no death camps with rows of crematory ovens, and there are no freight trains loaded with gays and mexicans and women seeking abortions headed to such camps - Trump is not, in fact, a modern Hitler.
I used to find it amusing that some people are this insane, but it's getting old and just plane annoying - these people are not even creative enough to be interesting at this point.
i think thats a problem with the device manufacturer. Once the content is delivered to the device, its the device that caches your notifications for review. Aparently they didnt think this type needed to be cached. I agree with you, but I am not sure there is much the feds can do. Not every device that is designed to recieve this actually has the feature you are talking about. Believe it or not but there are still a few 'dumb' phones still in ciculation.
I am not a lawyer, but there is something called a "declaratory judgement". You could think of a declaratory judgement as being about something that could happen but hasn't yet.
Wikipedia:
A declaratory judgment, also called a declaration, is the legal determination of a court that resolves legal uncertainty for the litigants. It is a form of legally binding preventive adjudication by which a party involved in an actual or possible legal matter can ask a court to conclusively rule on and affirm the rights, duties, or obligations of one or more parties in a civil dispute...
I'm your neighbour, and for years I've been yelling at you about how your driveway goes over my land, and that I'm going to sue you one of these days sonny boy see if I don't. You think I'm full of crap and would have no case. Now you want to do an expensive paving job on your driveway. The scenario you fear is: you pay lots of money for the job, then I get annoyed and actually get around to suing, and to your surprise I win, and you have to tear up the expensive job and have it redone. If you could be guaranteed I'd sue you in the near future, it would be fine: you'd fight the case, and at the end you'd know exactly what you could or could not do. But I'll probably never sue, so you face the prospect of never paving your driveway.
The declaratory judgement allows you to force this case into court, even though you are not the putatively wronged party. You ask the court to make a declaratory judgement that your driveway is not on my land, and then the court finds either for you or for me, and either way you have clarity.
So rather than waiting for Trump to use the text alert and then sue him for inappropriate use, you might seek a declaratory judgement as to what an appropriate use is. As mentioned above, I am not a lawyer, so I don't know whether this falls within the stuff you can get a declaratory judgement over.
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
Your memory isn't the only thing that matters, and some of us remember the numerous birther lawsuits, the endless haranging that Obama was going to FEMA camp us into martial law, and all sorts of other nonsense which you were and are conspicuously silent about, but somehow expect the country to be "patriotic" and not badmouth the CURRENT occupant of the White House as he shoots his mouth off.
Not everyone is dumb enough to not know how to disable amber alerts.
You're all a funny bunch of nuts jobs to the rest of the world. You're as entertaining as your President, so keep it up, the worlds needs to laugh more even if it's at your expense.
sure you can, it's called "cancelling service".
As an interesting side note, in theory the message that comes through could be something like: Due to state of emergency, 24 hour curfew in effect. Troops ordered to shoot on sight, shoot to kill.
Or: Nuke inbound to . LEAVE IMMEDIATELY.
Still don't want the alert?
Martial law would require advanced notice through multiple channels and media. There would be ample time to prepare accordingly.
On the other hand, an inbound nuclear warhead means you're gonna die immediately or some time in the next few days. Presuming you have 30 minutes advanced warning (it's more likely to be 5-10) you might have just enough time to get limber and kiss your ass goodbye.
blog
It would be nice if it were possible for millions of Americans to simultaneously tell Trump what we really thought of him in a way he had to listen to.
I believe the word you were looking for is "election" and people used it for that purpose in November 2016...
That's right. They are not the same. Few people had Obama Derangement Syndrome compared to tens of millions with TDS. But this madness is not over, it needs to play out further. It's going to be a neurotic society's Primal Scream.
Can we stop with the "Trump Derangement Syndrome"?
It's propaganda intended to dismiss the legitimate opinions about an elected official.
Trump is by all measures a terrible steward of the economy, the environment, diplomatic relations, the truth, etc. etc. It makes sense people are furious about his executive actions which to date amount to grift, corruption, dishonesty, and cronyism.
People upset about Trump's executive actions are not necessarily deranged. They're responding as one should to someone who wields executive power against the principles of the office to which they've been elected.
blog
Because he is using the federal emergency system to test.... the federal emergency system?
This is why I fucking hate the Democrats. It's not a "good thing" or "bad thing" with them. It's a bad person, and EVERY SINGLE THING HE DOES is resisted and casted in the worst possible light, every time. It gets old.
Besides, you can't sue the president for something the law essentially requires him to do.
I'd understand if people hated some of the things he says or does, and I've been a supporter of democratic candidates, but such unbridled hatred towards him has made me so fed up, I hope he just crushes them in the mid terms, gets his judge appointed, and is re-elected in 2020. Not because I am a fan or care, but because I think it's not as bad as the democratic behavior which is purely obstructionism and hatred at this point. I want to see them lose just because of the vitriol they spew.
Ultimately, he won the election. No matter who does, I want them to succeed, because success is success for my country.
You can opt out of Amber and other alerts. But not this one. That's a difference.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
What the hell makes you think that just because we hate president Dumpsterfire that anyone likes the Democrats a ton better? They're all awful, which is how we got this orange orangutan in the first place.
I think most of us would be thrilled with a "Fire them all" button where we could start over with all new people. The corrupt bastards from my state are some of the worst. I vote against them every 2 years, and nothing ever comes of it.
- Vincit qui patitur.
At least this test didn't wake me up in the middle of the night like most of the Amber alerts.
The odd part was that right after that, the oil refinery across the street from where I work tested their alert sirens. But that was just a coincidence - they do that every month on the first Wednesday.
>"This is truly chump change compared to the flapping pile of data dirt already stored on you, and I. Living in a crazy world is a grey scale of death by a thousand cuts. This is just one cut. Save the cries for the really deep ones."
I am very, very aware of how much spying and data collection is going on. Way before people like Snowden started raising eyebrows. Indeed this is just a small cut... but I tend to stand against all the cuts; they all hurt, and they are all additive. But don't think my ire is reserved for something just this small; I have plenty enough to go around. Although small, it is so visible, widespread, and so blatant an example of the nanny state, it is annoying enough to hold up as a good example of how individuals are continuously losing control to the state.
>sure you can, it's called "cancelling service".
And which mobile phone service can a citizen switch to that gives them the choice to turn off that alert?
>"Nuke inbound to . LEAVE IMMEDIATELY. Still don't want the alert?"
Did you read what I wrote? I will quote the last line for you:
"And yes, I would leave such an alert enabled."
But to play the devil's advocate, anyway.... there is nothing one could do that would make any difference in such a situation. And in your first example, it is silly to think one would have NO OTHER way of hearing about or discovering really important news, even if one did decide to turn off such a phone alert.
> You can also, as amply demonstrated by yourself, falsely claim that any witnesses at all(let alone every one of them) refute and deny claims even as what they really said is that they don't remember any specific incidents
So why doesn't Ford's life long friend remember the party where her friend was almost raped, where she had to flee down a short, narrow stairwell, and where she had no way home, due to cell phones not existing yet?
âoeSimply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford,â Howard Walsh, an attorney for Keyser, wrote.
Somehow, no one but Ford remembers this party at all. Somehow her friend didn't notice her missing from a gathering of 4-6 people (depending on when Ford was asked), despite her having to flee from two drunks and out the door. Ford did not know how she got to this party, who introduced her to the gathering, or how she got home.
Remember how she kept pushing for the dates that Kav's friend worked at the grocery store to pin things down? Pity it wasn't built until 1986, when Kav was no longer there. How did she meet Kav's friend there shortly after a party in 1982? Oh, and the second front door they went to counseling over? It was built in 2008 according to public records, not 2012, when they were fighting over it. It also doesn''t provide an escape route, just a second access for people who were renting the place. The notes don't mention Kav at all, either. The polygraph? I love how she changed the date on her account on the paper, doesn't know when it happened, or who paid for it.
The lady who questioned her goes into great detail as to why there's nothing to substantiate the account.
Oh, and the ice thing? Try reading the actual police report. I doubt it says what you think it does. But yes, feel free to regurgitate second-hand allegations without looking at primary sources, like the various property records, maps, etc. that show how her story keeps changing in response to people discovering it couldn't have happened the way it was remembered earlier. But yes, please tell me how speculation regarding various nonsense words that were more recently defined on Urban Dictionary (which also did not exist in 1982) is somehow "proof" of something, because you got caught in a lie when trying to attack a man who lives a life orderly enough to have calendars from 1982.
I say let him. When people are woken up at 3AM with a message from FEMA reading "CROOKED HILLARY BENGAZGATE ROBERT MUHLER IS FIRED" , the straight up outrage that'd cause against him would be worth the price of the interuption alone.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Oh my goodness. No. I live in Los Angeles. Jokes on you.
Besides. I didn't say I supported Trump, I said I don't support the vitriol and obstructionism. I'm sorry, but Obama never was sued for issuing alerts. This is just pure bullshit.
Through our collective consent, this is the leadership we ended up with. Now, I prefer to balls and strikes the guy. If he does something I like, I cheer. If he does something I don't, I cry foul.
What bothers me is most people can't name three things he did that they like, or at least agree with.
He supports changing the repliblican platform to support abortion for women in three circumstances (from 0 today).
He supports the use of medical marijuana (a first for republican president).
He struck back at an air base in Syria responsible for a chemical attack on a village with children.
If you can't say anything he did that you are for, you're too closed minded to have a conversation with.
"The president is the problem."
"[Trump is] the worst person in the world."
And why should we listen to anything you have to say? You make your bias clear and plain as day. I don't like Trump either, but you don't argue against this system by saying "trump is a big poo poo head".
https://www.wired.com/story/pr... for the details.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
The part you are talking about million sending a message to trump is called elections and you next chance is in 2020.
Until then, you'll have to cope with the butthurt.
What event woyld justify sending such a message and will it explain what people must do in that event.
Where I work we have a yearly fire drill, so in the event of a fire, people know where to go. So what would be a valud message for the whole country and will people all over the country know what to do?
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I see the same thing from the pro-Trump crowd. Most of them aren't actually traditional Republicans. Mention John McCain to them and they go into a rage about the RINO.
I've voted for more Republicans than Dems in my 30 years of voting, but their attitude of late is why I fucking hate today's Republicans or many of them at least.
To many of them, Trump can do no wrong and they take the same attitude you do that if if pisses off liberals then that's what REALLY matters to them. Fuck what's good for the country. They want to piss off most of the rest of Americans.
Some have openly said that even if Kavanaugh is guilty of attempted rape he should be confirmed. Others think it's a court of law where proof beyond a reasonable doubt must be presented. I honestly don't know if the accusations are true, but Kavanaugh has lied about other things as well and his positions on Constitutional are arguably partisan and very questionable.
It should take more than NOT having a criminal record to be confirmed to SCOTUS.
Trump loyalists have gone from chanting "LOCK HER UP!" being outraged that people might dare question the qualification of Trump's SCOTUS nominee, all while conveniently ignoring what the GOP did to Merrick Garland, a judge who was who was praised by many Republicans.
Orrin Hatch even suggested Obama should nominate Garland
"(Obama) could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man. He probably won't do that because this appointment is about the election."
- Orrin Hatch.
Republicans have repeatedly praised Merrick Garland
I see constant lies, hypocrisy, hatred and mud-slinging at every level from commenters on internet forums all the way up to the Oval Office.
And it's not that Dems are significantly better, but the GOP has really sunk to new lows and don't even appear to care about conservative policies anymore. If Dems are for it, they're against it. If Trump said it, they believe it. Case closed.
I'll admit I have hated Trump since the late '80s which is when I first started hearing about him, but occasionally he does do something right. But his loyal followers cannot admit that he ever does anything wrong.
Having about 300,000,000 cellphones vibrating altogether can trigger a massive earthquake.
It looks like that was added in 8.1
Android 8.1 feature spotlight: Emergency alerts get a history list and reorganized settings
And I just finally got updated to 8.0.0.
Which would be?
Imagine being so dense that you ignore all the people contradicting Kavanaugh's statements... Oh, wait, you don't have to imagine.
Ezekiel 23:20
Nuclear attacks are survivable. Heck, there is one unfortunate guy who was in Hiroshima when it got bombed, survived, went to Nagasaki and got another one. He died not very long ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/....
Basically, and I am no expert, a few minutes could give you enough time to go into a bunker which would protect you from the initial explosion and irradiation, and from there, you might be able to plot an escape from the fallout zone.
This is why I fucking hate the Democrats.
This stupidity is about the only thing in American politics that is truly bipartisan. You shouldn't hate democrats for it. You should hate the entire fucking political system.
This is why I fucking hate the Democrats. It's not a "good thing" or "bad thing" with them. It's a bad person, and EVERY SINGLE THING HE DOES is resisted and casted in the worst possible light, every time. It gets old.
This isn't really a "Democrat"-specific thing. A lot of Republicans treated Obama like the boogeyman, and everything he did was somehow nefarious. They tried to roadblock everything he did. They spent years hammering the Affordable Care Act-- which was largely a Republican bill, put forward as a compromise.
And not to say that Obama was perfect, but his behavior was, at the very least, much more in line with normal, respectable, Presidential behavior. Trump is a legitimate problem. He's a criminal and a walking disaster who has abused power at every turn.
You say you're not a fan, but I don't believe you. You say you don't care, but then you hope he "crushes them". If you're a Trump fan, at least admit it. Maybe you don't want to because you yourself know that he's a legitimate problem.
He struck back at an air base in Syria responsible for a chemical attack on a village with children.
Funny. This is exactly one of his few actions that I didn't support. Bashar al-Assad has been accused of (I believe) 3 chemical attacks in the last 6 years, and 2 of those were later shown to be either faked recordings or were performed by ISIS. On the other hand, ISIS is responsible for 57 chemical attacks in the region. From a numbers standpoint, obviously ISIS is much worse, and apparently has easy access to (or is at least more willing to use) chemical weapons.
Furthermore, a few weeks before the chemical attack that preceded Trump's strike on the air base, Trump said that "Bashar al-Assad's future should be decided by the Syrian people" and that he wanted to withdraw. Lo and behold, al-Assad immediately does the one thing that can force Trump to take military action against him. Either the guy is the dumbest and most suicidal leader in the history of the planet, he has people in his military undermining him, or it was a false flag.
The only good thing about Trump's bombing of the air base is that the Syrians and Russians were apparently forewarned and no one died, maybe one plane was destroyed and the landing strip got a few holes.
The best part about all of this is that the moment Trump started the bombing, the entire mainstream media started saying that "for the first times he looks presidential" and was kissing his ass. Fucking war-mongers.
The complexity of life continues to grow with every "good and nice and necessary" addition to our lives that demands attention and interaction and troubleshooting.
E Proelio Veritas.
I'd mod you up if I had points. So instead, I'll mention that I was not an Obama supporter (nor did I vote for Trump), but I can point to more than a dozen things that both of them did that I liked. If you can't, you're part of the problem, and too partisan to be rational.
Just another day in Paradise
The message will be "Covfefe". Your response should be to duck and cover.
Just another day in Paradise
Since the news and everyone is obsessed with the alert.... what is he trying to pass while everyone's attention is taken? At least that seems to be what usually happens in these cases (eg: passing more tax cuts recently while everyone was focused on Kavanaugh)
I just walked through the break room at work, and CNN was covering "COMEDIANS MOCK PRESIDENTIAL ALERT" and it was just clip after clip and image after image of tweets, posts, stand up, talk shows, etc, making fun of the alert. 5 minutes later I walked through again and they were STILL talking about it. What's so newsworthy about comedians mocking a small event? It's not like someone joked about decapitating Trump again. It's just: "Oh no, an alert noise! We're doing this? This annoying sound again! It's so annoying, EVERYONE LAUGH WITH ME."
It should also deliver some of his finest tweets. 2:30AM message from Trump, stating he loves Mexicans because Taco Salad is delicious.
I recall this being set up during the Obama Administration
What part of "being set up during" didn't you understand? He didn't say it was tested then.
Just another day in Paradise
So having an emergency system during 9/11 or some other major incident is useless? Got it.
Just another day in Paradise
Yea, took reading this for me to find it. I dismissed it because it was loud and annoying, quick scan looking for it after so I can read it didn't yield in any usual place.
Why are you so obtuse? Do you really believe the drivel you're shoveling?
Republicans withheld on Garland for the same reason that Democrats are frothing over Kavanaugh. Garland was NOT a simple replacement for Scalia, he was a balance-changing nominee completely at odds with the Justice he was nominated to replace, like Kavanaugh. Once Trump won and nominated Neil Gorsuch to replace Garland as the nominee for Calia's slot, that was easier to stomach even for Democrats because it didn't fundamentally alter the Court's makeup.
Should RBG pass while Trump is still in office and Trump nominates Amy Barrett, I fully expect Democrats to lose their minds again, and probably have Professor Ford "recall" that Amy Barrett tried to rape her once 35 years ago, too.
Just for the fun of it, I'd like to see Trump nominate Bill Clinton. How would the #metoo and #resist work out that dilemma? If everything Trump does is evil and he nominated Bill Clinton, then nominating Bill Clinton is evil and must be resisted. Bill Clinton was accused of rape and #shemustbebelieved, so he should be disqualified.
The head-spinning would be like a cat with buttered toast strapped to its back, then dropped from a mild height.
Captain Kirk: Everything Harry tells you is a lie. Remember that. Everything Harry tells you is a lie.
Harcourt Fenton Mudd: Now listen to this carefully, Norman. I am... lying.
Norman: You say you are lying, but if everything you say is a lie, then you are telling the truth, but you cannot tell the truth because everything you say is a lie, but you lie... You tell the truth but you cannot for you lie... illogical! Illogical! Please explain! You are human. Only humans can explain their behavior! Please explain!
Captain Kirk: [giving him the same statement the androids have repeatedly given him several times before] I am not programmed to respond in that area.
In light of the current Kavanaugh allegations, which Democrat's say could not possibly be made up, and that all women must be believed even without even the flimsiest of evidence...
We have here Kieth Ellison, the deputy chair of the DNC, former Congressman from Minnesota is also running for Minnesota AG spot. His ex-girlfriend Karen Monahan, a Sierra Club activist and Ellison’s ex-girlfriend, accused the Minnesota Democrat of emotionally and physically abusing her during their relationship.
"Monahan published a November 2017 medical document on Sept. 19 showing she told her doctor about alleged “emotional and physical abuse” and named Ellison as the alleged abuser.
"Ellison did not challenge the document’s authenticity during Friday’s debate but claimed it came “as she was putting together the allegation she made two days before the primary.”
"Ellison’s primary didn’t take place until nine months after Monahan told her doctor about the alleged abuse.
"Ellison also could not guarantee Friday that more accusers won’t come forward, suggesting women may “cook up” allegations because of the “current political environment.”
"The DNC, where Ellison is the deputy chair, originally said on Aug. 14 that it would be “reviewing” the allegations but DNC Chair Tom Perez later deferred to the DFL’s investigation.
I am the only person I know who didn't get this message. I don't have emergency or amber alerts turned off, my phone wasn't off or in airplane mode. I have an iPhone 7+, on AT&T. Wired has a story that tells you what to do if you didn't receive the message: Why Didn't I Get an Emergency Presidential Alert Text?
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
This is one of those lawsuits that should have been dismissed the instant it was filed. There's nothing to litigate! It's an answered political question - the legislature debated the idea and passed a bill that Obama signed. There's no Constitutional question, there's no injury, no nothing. The plaintiffs are asking the court to litigate political bias.
"It would be nice if it were possible for millions of Americans to simultaneously tell Trump what we really thought of him in a way he had to listen to."
Well, there was an election in 2016 where 65M people said they agreed with him enough so that he should be President. There's another coming up in 2020.
"Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won."
He supports the use of medical marijuana (a first for republican president).
Where's the proposed policy on this, and why pick one of the most anti-marijuana people around to be the Attorney General?
Indeed. Too bad every one of those tornado alerts I got were hundreds of miles away from me and always at some insane time, and with an EXTREMELY loud and frightening alarm. And so I turned that portion off. Don't even get me started about "amber alerts"...
There is at least some logic to events that occur within a few hundred miles being notified to you. Here's a few off the top of my head although I'm not saying they are good reasons.
1. Tornados can travel over a hundred miles. It's uncommon but it can happen. I don't know how they determine the notification area but I would probably be pretty okay with these alerts if they were doing them based on possible paths for tornados that show no signs of letting up.
2. Most people live within a few hundred miles of where they grew up. You may know people in the affected area that may not get the notification but have a way to notify them.
3. Amber alerts do have a lag time such that an abductee may be over 100 miles away before the amber alert is issued. This is a structural problem for amber alerts. They have to have a vetting process to ensure it's a legitimate risk to the child so that they control the total number of alerts that go out. Too many and people shut them off for being too annoying making them less valuable to help rescue the child. Unfortunately, this typically means that more time passes which increases the max distance the abductor could travel increasing the area which the alert goes out to...
And yet we are not "allowed" to turn off "Presidential Alerts"
The real issue here is one of principle. I don't think the government- ANY BRANCH OR ANY ONE in the government should have the "right" to force message me on my personal mobile phone.
I agree with you on this.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
It's sad that people even give a flying fuck about this message. Oh, test message.
Loud unexpected noise from a device I've told to stay fucking silent? Hell yes I give a fuck.
Guaranteed to piss me off, whoever fucking sent it.
Then you need anger management lessons.
If you're that touchy, try quitting coffee. Something's inherently wrong here. Your phone buzzed once. Did you get your pistol? Throw something? See a professional.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
What event woyld(sic) justify sending such a message and will it explain what people must do in that event.
Ask Hawaii.
Wrong place to look, an AG choosing not to enforce certain laws he disagrees with is not the way to get those laws changed. Enforcing them vigorously is a good way to get things changed, because it makes the problem with those laws obvious.
What the President could do (and should do if he really supports medical marijuana) is direct the FDA to re-schedule it; this would pretty much solve the problem overnight. This goes for any President, whether it be Obama or Trump.
But really the law is ultimately in the hands of the Legislative branch.
Well, they can be but it depends on a several factors such as distance, yield and number of hits.
I built a a high end bomb shelter (decontamination showers, weapon lockers, air handling, etc.) when I was a contractor in the 80's. If you're far enough away from a single blast, you can survive the flash burn in almost any building. Even then, the serious problem comes from multiple hits, e.g., a sporadic exchange. Very difficult to deal with that. The fallout is actually the easiest to deal with. The over pressure is the problem from a construction standpoint.
>>Basically, and I am no expert, a few minutes could give you enough time to go into a bunker which would protect you from the initial explosion and irradiation, and from there, you might be able to plot an escape from the fallout zone.
Step 1: Build a serious bunker. Oops, don't have one and your very cooperative neighbors don't either? Screwed, you are..
Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
Identity politics is divisive. I'm sick of the ad-hom everywhere instead of arguments with substance.
.
Now, if we could get back to on-topic, or at least sort of, rather than fronting every single thread with trolling on this subject...it'd be nice. I sometimes wonder if the trolls & haters aren't really on the side they attack just to bring more support to the attacked parties due to revulsion caused by the attacks.
Most people don't talk about having voted for Dumpsterfire just to burn it down and cause the rats to make their identities clear, but I know plenty who did just that.
Why guess when you can know? Measure!
Did you get your pistol? Throw something?
No. I got pissed off. A professional isn't going to fucking help with that.
It's possible to get pissed off and show minimal to no signs of this to others. That doesn't mean you're not pissed off, and it sure as fuck doesn't mean some cunt should be allowed to go around pissing you off.
Is there anything Trump has done that you think is good? If you can't name anything, then you have Trump derangement syndrome.
You forgot to account for the most likely explanation there, sport: Or Trump is just a gigantic piece of shit. And given what we know about him, that's the likeliest explanation. Literally everything he has done which has not been harmful has been insufficient. For example, his response to the disaster in PR. Responding to it wasn't bad, but the response was pathetic and should be condemned on that basis.
If you can name one thing that Trump has done that you think is good, you're either a corrupt weasel or a spectacular dumbass.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I have Android 8.0. Every time I get a new alert I can see the old ones... so watch the weather and when it looks like a stormpocalypse is about to happen somewhere, go there, get the alert, and the alert history is revealed.
how clueless, President Barack Obama signed the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System Modernization Act of 2015.
This is a prime example of "never give yourself the power to do something you wouldn't want your political opponents to do."
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
How about "an EMP is coming in 10 minutes due to { solar flare | foreign attack | we done f'd up } unplug all electronics / disconnect your house mains power immediately."
Even a national emergency alert system is subject to Trump derangement syndrome. If he does it, it must be a bad thing and all the maniacs who hate him will go ballistic with lawsuits and random howling. If Obama had sent all these people a text message, they would all be drooling and begging for more.
Democrats are FAR worse. With the Republicans, their lunatic fringe really is that. It's a fringe. It gets a lot of grief from the rest of the party. The Democrats fully embrace their wing nuts. They're far more numerous.
Although liberal wing nuts are magnified by the media that has largely dropped all pretense at this point.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Talk about blind fanatics.
So we'll believe she has "indelibly etched in her hippocampus" fantastically detailed, second by second replay memory of events in a closed room, which no one else was privy to, but then cannot remember where it was, when it was, how she got there, who drove her home. If she was in fact so traumatized as to be "afraid he'd kill me", she would definitely remember these details, but she can only remember those things which cannot be verified or debunked. Isn't that convenient. Her own best friends says she has no idea what she's talking about. There are no verifiable facts to work with here, nothing but her heresay.
Therefore he has no way to "prove innocence" as many say he must (a disgusting term to begin with, and leftists bitch about Russia??) because there is NO evidence to work with.
False accusations happen, but particularly when politics are at stake.
Stop watching CNN and their "drunken frat boy" character assassination. Just about every college kid drinks. Obama smoked weed and snorted coke, but he became POTUS. So I guess he wasn't fit for his job either, by this same logic.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
> A lot of Republicans treated Obama
A vanishingly small number compared to liberal wing nuts.
> Affordable Care Act-- which was largely a Republican bill,
This was a product of MASSACHUSETS. That is hardly a Republican bastion. You can't even lay off the obvious bullshit for a single minute.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
He supports the use of medical marijuana (a first for republican president).
I think Trump needs to get a script of that.
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
I'm not telling you to support it, I'm saying if your argument is based on who is making a case or arguing a point, then I don't give a rats ass what your cnn-brainwashed idiot head thinks. It's soaked with "I'm an angel and my values are better than this persons" bleach.
I'm saying, give me substance. What do you not like? Which policy direction? What law? Which executive order. A president does dozens of things every day. This "dumpster fire" is rearranging global supply chains. He is changing the way American business is taxed to bring it more in line with European business tax rates (I disagreed with the personal tax rate changes, but I suspect they need one to get the other). He gave a tax holiday for foreign income repatriation. EVERYONE can agree that was a good thing? If you can't, then you are clearly a partisan sctick, and I don't give a rats ass what you say.
Oh, and insulting the commenter for suggesting something he didn't (I never said we should support Trump, I said we should call each move like it is: balls and strikes), just shows how much identity politics you play.
I think the Alert was good. I wonder if anyone in the DC plane would have taken it down on 9/11 if they knew what happened to the two planes in New York, like the guys in Pennsylvania did. Alerts are good, and anyone who doesn't think so, just hates the guy at the top, and not what he is doing.
He reliably pisses off lefties. That should count for something.
Nonaggression works!
This project was started in 2006...
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
And sadly this is going to happen every 3 years.
So be prepared for this unacceptable and damaging intrusion. Every 3 years.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
he said it was a failure. what part of him making up stupid lies don't you understand?
I really dislike Trump. And I am highly critical of his administration. But some people are really hung up on this emergency alert system like it's some kind of huge invasion. You put up with 80% of your mailbox being full of ads, but you get one unblockable test message for an emergency service and you lose your shit?
Maybe you should focus on the real wrongs Trump has done, and not the inane distractions he creates for you. I hope the liberals win back the government, but goddamn they can get stuck on stupid sometimes.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Doesn't matter who signed it, I actually think it was a good bill, until the individual mandate entered into it. And I don't care which political party you say you are, no one gets to tell me I have to buy anyone's product by force. And I'm sorry, it's by force. If I don't I get fined. If I don't pay or agree to pay it, it's prison. If I resist prison, I get killed by police.
Because with Trump, the level of obstructionism is reaching levels not seen since the civil war, the last time democrats tried to obstruct this much, 600,000 Americans lost their lives.
What is spectacular is your confirmation of the principle. To illustrate it to you, consider a hypothetical Wife Derangement Principle:
Bob: "Is there anything your wife has done that you think is good? If you can't name anything, then you have Wife derangement syndrome."
Chris: "You forgot to account for the most likely explanation there, sport: my wife is just a gigantic piece of shit. And given what I know about her, that's the likeliest explanation. Literally everything she has done which has not been harmful has been insufficient."
Chris (continuing, agitated): "If you can name one thing that my wife has done that you think is good, you're either evil or a spectacular dumbass."
Would you really think there's any merit to Chris's words, or would you say this guy is blinded with hate? She cannot possibly be that bad or she wouldn't have been part of the society, they wouldn't have gotten married, she wouldn't have any friends and so on.
No.. Absolutely no. Yes there was republican bluster about Obama, and some actions for actual policies he had they didn't like (Like ACA)... but there was absolutely NOT insane media campaigns daily about every minute detail of his life, and people coming out of the woodwork for crap he did every day. Think Obama was clean? He wasn't. Everyone forget his crazy church he said he was a part of for 20 years and the pastor was his mentor? Then that pastor turned out to be a crazy racist? Obama walked away as if he'd never heard of him. People let him get away with it... instead of having that crazy pastor shipped around to every news outlet to talk, while people get on social media everywhere bringing it up for things it has nothing to do with. No, that is uniquely and insanely Democratic in nature. Just remember, now that you and your buddies have laid the groundwork for ridiculous personal invasion for your candidates... the Republicans will remember and will likely continue. The filth you start now will come back to haunt you. Every moron said when Obama was elected that the public will keep bringing up the color of the president's skin when anything happens. They were right... but it took 8 years for it to happen. 2016 and it's all they can say.
You know these same three would have been some of the first to want to impeach the President if the system hadn't been tested and didn't work in a major emergency.
Trump and Republican Derangement Syndrome at it's finest right there.
Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
Alerts are good, and anyone who doesn't think so, just hates the guy at the top, and not what he is doing.
See, that's the sort of partisan blindness I was talking about. Doesn't matter if we have good reasons, you can't see them because of your cranial location.
We already have regional alerts. So what's the use-case of a national one that's not entirely covered already by a regional one? Name one thing that requires the ability to message everyone in Hawaii and Maine at the same time. One. Between social media and the news networks, anything affecting some small part of the country will be sufficiently covered for everyone else in a very timely fashion.
Nation-wide alerts are not good. Doesn't matter who is at the top. They're either going to be political bullshit or incite mass panic. Or be worthless because they come way too late or are for an event a thousand miles away that affects 0.1% of the population at most.
You are making a laughable claim that we all need a government spokesperson in our pocket to tell us stuff, and we're haters for not liking it and thinking we need it.
This alert plan was started under Obama, and it was stupid then, and it was finished up and tested under Trump, and it's stupid now. Doesn't have anything to do with the person at the top. It has everything to do with limited potential for use and unlimited potential for abuse.
And your plane example is hilarious, because this is SMS and most people still can't get/send SMSes while airborne.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
I find it incredible that so many are misinformed about this issue.
As stated, Obama signed this bill in 2016 and the message was sent by FEMA, not Trump.
Perhaps the real issue is that the alert is called a "Presidential Alert", which it was not.
It was a FEMA alert.
FWIW, there is no way to disable the alert on our Android phones.
You got me...standing down.
Just another day in Paradise
No. Sorry. If planes are being hijacked, and the scale isn't understood, you can't confine the alert to a region.
Secondly, SMSs do work on domestic flights these days, but that's besides the point. You're saying a system shouldn't exist because of technical challenges without knowing what the technical solution is. Most domestic planes have cell repeaters for use with SMS, not to mention WiFi on board.
But forget all that. Let's say you are right about this specific use case. 1. That's something we should fix. 2. Let's say we detect a space bound ICBM heading to the US, can't pinpoint the trajectory. Great, just alert everyone to duck and cover for 10
Minutes, might save a million or so lives. Even more so if there are more incoming.
No. You just can't stand the guy at the top.
I think one of the roles of government should be protecting and defending its populace. This serves to further that goal.
Only liberals can come up with some shit this stupid... They should have their case thrown out of court and then be forced to pay fines for wasting time and being ridiculous children. It's called the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System, it predates Trump and has been around as long as most of us have been alive... just as with anything else, it's simply being adapted to utilize modern technologies which allow more immediate spread of information. Incredible that liberals have become so unhinged that a test message of enhanced capabilities of the national emergency alert system can trigger them into hysteria. Honestly, it kinda makes me wish Trump would just start using the IPAWS instead of twitter.
I don't think you understood what he meant. He didn't want to see another establishmentarian president. He didn't want a Bush, or a Clinton, or some senator with 20 years in Washington with debts, skeletons, allegiances, and scores to settle. He wanted an outsider. If you think trump isn't one, your the one who's fucking retarded.
Pray you never have to find out. Inbound ICBMs comes to mind. So does space hazards, a large nuclear disaster with winds... just to name a few. Better to have it and not need it, than need it any not have it in this case.
Actually, it's just that not everyone is so self involved and without regard for others that they feel they NEED to disable Amber alerts... Does a text notification really trigger you so badly that you'd rather not potentially save a child?
Let's say we detect a space bound ICBM heading to the US, can't pinpoint the trajectory.
Yeah, 1) that doesn't happen, and 2) so we panic 325,000,000 people, of whom perhaps 3% at most might be directly impacted by this (Population of NYC) with a message that won't help and won't save them anyway?
When I said that the only uses are political shenanigans and mass panic, this is exactly what I was talking about. And the fact that you think the government could figure out we're under attack and send an appropriately crafted message in 10 minutes? That's hilarious. Are you five?
I think one of the roles of government should be protecting and defending its populace.
I do too.
This serves to further that goal.
The fact that you don't understand how useless this is, and how ripe for abuse it is really makes you sound like a child.
No. You just can't stand the guy at the top.
And yeah, you argue like one.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
I don't know if you Americans consider it "good" or not, but as a Canadian he was able to take quite a bit of ground in the recent USMCA. We were lucky to not have been pushed further, and likely only because he wanted a deal in place in time for the mid-terms. Go read Canadian newpapers - Canada got bent over on a number of fronts, and gained very little ground, to America's benefit. I can only imagine it was the same way for Mexico.
That said, I think TDS is a real phenomenon... I've seen people argue here Trump got tricked by Canada in the USMCA, which is laughable if you've read any of it and know trade history between Canada-US.
You can sue someone for something they could do but havenÃ(TM)t?
A number of years ago I bought property and was preparing to build a house on that property. The property had covenants that constrained the design and materials of house constructed under the covenants, and named a single individual as having the right to approve/disapprove of plans with respect to compliance with the covenants. I had a house designed that complied with the constraints. The individual who putatively controlled approvals for construction refused my design, adding additional (more expensive) constraints with respect to materials that were not present in the covenants.
I consulted a lawyer to understand my options:
For those who care... I opted to comply with the additional material constraints without any attempt at a declaratory judgement; I reasoned that the guaranteed cost of litigation plus the possibility of having the additional materials expense anyway was less desirable than simply building with the more expensive material and avoiding litigation, and definitely more desirable than the "build first" and see if he sues approach (the individual in question was a lawyer, and it seemed likely that he would proceed with a suit over materials even if he couldn't win it). The more expensive material made my home worth more (although not necessarily worth as much as the added expense of that material). I viewed the approver as an a-hole, but judged that I could go on living my life without psychological scarring (which I did).
Democrats are FAR worse.
The other side always is.
And when it was signed into law under Obama, I think I remember the Republican-leaning part of the population being equally outraged at it.
As someone generally Republican leaning, not a fan of Obama, who has despised Trump since the 1980s...
I thought it was a useful capability when the Obama administration proposed it. I still think it's a good idea now. No matter who's president.
I do not recall anyone objecting to it when it was an Obama administration thing. Not one person. Ever.
Any citation for "the Republican-leaning part of the population being equally outraged at it"? I'm sure you'll be able to find one idiot. Maybe two. One of them will likely be Alex Jones, but I never listed to that jackass. Anybody mainstream? Even on the outer edges of the mainstream?
Yeah. I thought not.
He reliably pisses off lefties. That should count for something.
There is that.
"There's so much good in the worst of us,
And so much bad in the best of us,
That it ill behooves any of us
To find fault with the rest of us."
Not sure who said that. Opinions on the source vary.
Because you claim that experts claim this? Where are your citations? I call BS in this case, she wasn't actually raped, just pushed, and briefly groped according to her. If that is reportedly enough to scramble someone's memories so they don't need to provide more information of a useful nature, then no man is safe from a woman who wants to claim you sexually assualted her but doesn't have to provide any verifiable type details at all.. a selective memory, heresay, is enough. My wife was raped from a group "friend" of her hers, some years before we met, and she says you damn well remember everything, so long as you aren't beaten half unconscious. Which Ford did not claim.
No my friend, the partisanship is all yours; you want to believe the democrats who trot out a woman as a last ditch resort at the 11th hour, with literally absolutely no usable evidence whatsoever, whose own friends will not corroborate her story, because you don't want another conservative judge on the SCOTUS. I'd consider this if there were some kind of evidence, and it were brought to light at the beginning of the confirmation process when all the data is supposed to have been put out there, but they didn't do that, and there is none. Not to mention the suspicious tactics, she lied about a fear of flying, AND ignored their offer to come to her.
Failing the accusations, a man who has been accused of the very serious and nasty things he was accused of (and he was responding more to Avenetti's clients' claims than to Dr. Ford when he got angry), has a right to be justifiably angry when his hard earned reputation is being dragged through the mud and his family threatened, but now you try to claim that disqualifies him. Funny, NBC was hinting that he was creepy for remaining calm during his interview with Martha MacCallum, just minutes before his testimony. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. He isn't presiding over a case here where he's the impartial judge, this is all about his own life, and it's gotten personal and dirty. He's responding as a client.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
I understand that but it's not germane as to whether he's fit for the title or not, if that is being used as an argument.
He either isn't fit, because of his supposed "drinking" problem they keep citing, or he is. Many of the same people who had no problem voting for Obama, knowing his past drug use in college, now say Kavanaugh is essentially unfit for the SCOTUS for his alleged binge drinking in college, even if he didn't assault any of those women. That's a double standard.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Selective enforcement is how you end up with a lot of minorities in jail for certain crimes that are committed equally by all ethnic groups. The People either want a law or they don't, if the law is oppressive it needs to be eliminated not ignored at the whims of individuals within the Executive branch. Someone can always unignore it later, which is precisely what happened with Sessions.
> Because none of that applies to the friend who had no traumatic encounter and no knowledge of this Kavanaugh person.
> For her, it was apparently just another party.
Where her friend mysteriously disappeared, despite having to go past her to get to the door and having no way to arrange a ride home?
> That people who are apologists for Kavanaugh are making it out as if Keyser refuted the claim, that she denied aby incident, discredits them, and by extension Kavanaugh.
She doesn't even remember how many people where there, ALL of the named persons disconfirm the story, and the Safeway she made central to her Senate testimony didn't exist until 4 years later according to public records. She has a history of changing her story every time evidence disconfirms it. The door she went to counseling in 2012 to get was built back in 2008. There are giant holes in every single part of the story she does remember, so the fact that your central witness can't remember anything about the alleged assault while Bret can tell you exactly where he was for the entire summer of 1982 simply underscores the fact that this is pure nonsense.
> You, of course, don't see the problem with your own actions.
You stole my words. I get that you don't like him, but to be unable to see through the obvious pattern of lies just makes me feel sorry for you. Are you always this easily manipulated or is it just hate blindness?
Can we stop with the "Trump Derangement Syndrome"?
I wish we could wish it away, but if wishes were horses beggars would ride.
It's propaganda intended to dismiss the legitimate opinions about an elected official.
Hardly. It's a description of a large number of ridiculous fictions. Like Trump is going to use the IPAWS and WEA system to replace Twitter when he gets banned from that, and he's going to declare national emergencies so he can force everyone in the country to see his comments.
Like so-called medical professionals who diagnose all kinds of mental conditions based on zero contact with the patient, and then claim their statements about his medical condition aren't actually diagnoses for some magical reason only they know.
Like "Orange Hair" and other personal insults as a basis for objecting to his actions.
Full-blown TDS almost always includes a rant about how HRC won some fictional "popular vote" and should be President. Those who protest with the belief that their mob rule should replace rule of law are in full onset TDS.
So, no, TDS does not refer to legitimate opinions or arguments. I am interested to see you admit that he is an elected official, by the way.
People upset about Trump's executive actions are not necessarily deranged.
Of course not, and nobody is saying that just being upset is a sign of TDS. It's what you are upset about, why, and how you express that upset that is a sign of TDS. Another example? Democratic senators who demand even more background investigation into the latest SCOTUS nominee before they'll consider voting for him, and then announce their vote decision before the investigation they demanded is finished and the reports are in. Because it's a Trump nominee.
They're responding as one should to someone who wields executive power against the principles of the office to which they've been elected.
Well, there you go. That's the kind of argument that points to TDS. You're talking about a specific person and not policies in general. You're turning your opinion of the "principles of the office" into a personal attack. Some of us had opinions on the former resident's use of the "principles of the office", like saying if the congress that is empowered to do something doesn't do what he wants, he'll do it on his own. Of course, anyone who tried turning that opinion into a personal attack usually got shouted down with cries of "racist", because of course any personal attack on a person of color is racism, even if it is because he's abusing the "principles of the office" to which he was elected. It's ok when the occupant is Trump, however, because, well, "we" just can't see our way clear to accepting that he won, and the office and the power that goes with it actually are his to use. We'll just demand that he not use any of it because, well, Trump. That's TDS in a nutshell.
No one is forced to have a phone.
The EAS, sometimes known as the Emergency Alert System, has been around since the 1950s, when it was CONELRAD, then the Emergency Broadcast System. It interrupts with a test broadcast randomly, at least once a month. All AM/FM stations in the USA are required to have a working and tested EAS. Now there's IPAWS and WEA.
Alert messaging in broadcasting is probably older than you are. The more unified alerts are recent. I never said they were efficient, but there is long precedent for them. Why people get gnarled over them escapes me. It's much akin to having to listen to a car horn, and sometimes, as meaningful/less.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Your memory isn't the only thing that matters
Wow. One website posting a link to an engadget story is now "outrage" on an epic scale. The worst thing said there was "So now Barack can track your calls and send you messages, too." (Trump is blamed for any action any executive branch agency takes today; Obama is being blamed for NSA phone activity then.) What an amazing bit of "outrage". I didn't see any mention of filing a lawsuit to stop him, did you forget to include that link?
and some of us remember the numerous birther lawsuits, the endless haranging that Obama was going to FEMA camp us into martial law,
You know, I don't remember how the "birther lawsuits" or FEMA stuff had anything to do with outrage over IPAWS or WEA. Can you elaborate a bit?
and all sorts of other nonsense which you were and are conspicuously silent about,
You don't know what I was silent about 8 years ago, and why would I rage about any of that today? Is your argument on this issue really "you guys did it a little bit to Obama, so we get to do really stupid levels of it to Trump today"? Or the third-grader "you started it, nanner nanner boo boo!"
CURRENT occupant of the White House as he shoots his mouth off.
I'm sorry, but the IPAWS/WEA test was not Trump "shooting his mouth off".
Really? Then why has the current disruptive obnoxious usage been used to report things like heavy rain conditions?
You've gotten Presidential IPAWS/WEA alerts for "heavy rain"? Really? Sorry, I don't believe it. Had that EVER happened, there would have been story after story in the mainstream media about the abuse of the system, just like there were stories all over the place about the Hawaii mistake for their alert system. You think there were a lot of stories about Hawaii, I can assure you the outpouring of news and opinion about a misuse of the IPAWS/WEA Presidential alert system would make the Hawaii thing look like nothing.
What you probably got are the local alerts, WHICH YOU CAN DISABLE, and which are NOT the kind of alerts I was talking about. You probably know that, however.
So be prepared for this unacceptable and damaging intrusion. Every 3 years.
I am pretty sure you're using sarcasm here. Ok.
I'll just point out that having an emergency alert system means nothing if you've never tested it to make sure it works. It's actually worse than useless because there will be people who rely on it to get alerts and when it doesn't work they can be hurt. The last test showed that the system wasn't working, so we've had another. Which didn't get an alert to my phone, but I have no idea why not.
Second, the weekly test alerts on TV are actually a lot more damaging than the Presidential alerts. You may be in the middle of a TV show, or you may have tried timeshifting one, and your program gets shut off. A software glitch from Comcast in my area resulted in my CableCard receivers being switched to the EAS channel for the test, and then not switching back at the end. I went to sleep watching a real channel and woke up to CSPAN (the EAS channel in this system). If you can imagine how much fun it is to talk to Comcast technical support about a minor issue with your service, imagine trying to deal with them over a hidden system-based technical issue. "We can schedule a service tech to visit tomorrow ..."
This was *literally* Obama's idea which FEMA had been working on for a couple of years.
I would be a buck or two they would have said totally different if the idea had come to fruition prior to the 2016 election.
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
> The problem I have with you is your apologia for Kavanaugh can't be believed. All your citation of a post-dated letter means is what? That you think a claim produced after a fact is legitimate evidence? That's laughable.
So do you believe a 2012 note from counseling despite the door happening in 2008? Or maybe you believe Urban Dictionary? Fact is, that's something those people actually know--they would have actually played the game with him. It's not like this "oh, I heard her allegations only *26* years after the fact" nonsense.
> Same goes with all your claims about these witnesses. Contrary to your assertions, none of them have denied the events, what they have denied is knowledge of them. In fact, that woman you claimed "disconfirmed" something wrote a letter to disagree with the misrepresentations that were made about her statements refuting the assault. Funny that too.
Kav & his friend most certainly did directly deny it. You might expect that, but it's interesting that neither one said "oh, we were at the party but it didn't happen" and instead said "there was no party"--something corroborated by Ford's best friend.
> Besides, and this may shock you, I know it totally perplexed the guy at Wal-Mart today, I don't care for a single thing Ford said. I care about how Kavanaugh reacted, and I slightly care about how you've reacted in the sense that I enjoy the joke you're making of yourself.
Actually I get that--the facts never mattered here and you're just trolling me. But here's the shocker: I don't care either. I will still let people know the truth, I can always just pretend I'm talking to the wall. We all know that the most damning allegation against him to most people has always been that he's a Republican.
> Your inability to understand how memory works, for example, does not serve you well at all. Nor your citing a recent letter. Nor somebody trying to edit Wikipedia. Even your focus on Ford is just bad for you, as there is no trial or lawsuit, it is about being confirmed to the Supreme Court. Anything else? A joke.
I do know how memory works--including how unreliable it is and even why it's unreliable. The fact that her memories *changed* and kept changing in response to newly discovered facts that things *couldn't* have happened the way she originally alleged is what shows how she deserves to be charge with perjury.
> So Kavanaugh? Discredited by his own failure to admit his drinking behavior as well as his intemperate response and cries of victimhood. He just lacks the moral fortitude and mental equanimity to be on the Supreme Court.
Obama did cocaine and made President. Tell us another one about how liking beer disqualifies you from higher office, please, it's hilarious. Making death threats against his family isn't a good reason to be upset to you? A crazy person tried to kill Trump & Mattis the other day too by mailing ricin, I wonder if you even heard about that. Yeah, it'd never work (they scan for that), but logic never was your guys' strong suit, was it?
> That just makes him sound like an idiot who doesn't want the American people to have the truth, no matter who it hurts.
Here's some truth that hurts: by the end of the weekend you will be able to call him Associate Justice Kavanaugh. You lose.
Ginsberg is most likely the next one to replace. She's too old to hold on much longer and this nonsense has hurt vulnerable Democrats in the polls. Based on her age, she has roughly a double-digit percentage chance to die each year. If Trump gets a second term, you'll probably be looking at 7-2 splits for a generation.
Where is reality's liberal bias now?
Not everyone. But a disturbingly large number of people...
I tend to rant.
It pisses me off that a cunt like you goes around saying cunts like you can't go around pissing you off.
I tend to rant.
Such lip flatulence. Good thing there's not a flame nearby.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Being pissed off without showing any external signs isn't an anger issue, and isn't going to cause harm to others.
Recognising that you're pissed off is in fact a good thing. Everybody gets pissed off, just that some of us are better at hiding it.
A vanishingly small number compared to liberal wing nuts.
No, it's not a vanishingly small number. Even if you want to argue that it's not the majority, it's certainly the loudest contingent. Look on Fox News, or any of the Republican "news" outfits. They all still talk like Obama and Clinton are evil incarnate. Even the current president spent years pushing the racist conspiracy theory that Obama wasn't a real American.
This was a product of MASSACHUSETS
Ok, history lesson: Massachusetts isn't the only place that sort of setup has been suggested. Back when Bill Clinton was president, he was pushing for a single-payer system, and the response from Republicans in Congress was to suggest something very similar to what eventually became the Affordable Care Act. Then, when Obama was running for president, he and McCain were both advocating for something like the Affordable Care Act, the big difference being that Obama didn't want to have a mandate that everyone buy insurance, and McCain argued that you needed the mandate or else the requirement to cover pre-existing conditions would be too expensive for insurance companies, thereby driving up prices.
Obama eventually compromises and adopts the Republican plan, at which point the Republicans shift, throw a hissy fit, and claim the whole plan is socialist wealth redistribution. They make a big stink about the mandate, which was something that Republicans wanted in order to protect insurance companies.
I have sources too. Several of them.
Alas, they disagree with each other.
and even as I said, claiming that pointing out the buffoonery of Trump is unpatriotic.
I made no such claim. Go harass someone else.
The electronic trespass rubric seems like a sham to me. If there were a tornado coming through, you'd want to know. A national emergency like some fool N Korean lobbing stuff at the USA, yeah, a real one (not the stupid fake one of recent memory) is important.
The story, the lawsuit, and the people are all batshit insane.
That being said, I did feel violated when I received the message. I also felt violated when I received warnings about weather. I didn't buy my phone to allow the government to communicate with me. We could have missiles coming over from Russia or China and I would still feel violated by the alerts. It is *MY* device, not theirs.
TL;DR, got my Note 3 out to use since I can put Lineage OS on it and avoid this crap.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
If a nuke is headed my way, there's *nothing* such a message could do to help.
"A launch of high level EMP nuclear devices has been detected. ETA is ten minutes over the west coast, 20 minutes over Kansas ..." There's a lot of mitigation you can do in ten or twenty minutes to help reduce the damage to your electronic devices. Just unplugging things is going to help alot. You might even pull all the circuit breakers as an immediate first step, that's going to take what, a minute at most? Turning your cellphone off and wrapping it in Al foil will take another minute -- which means you may have a working cell phone tomorrow.
I feel your pain. But it's a small pain.
Of many things, this is one of the ones not to worry about, IMHO.
I was going to replace my Galaxy Note, but oh well. No rest for the wicked.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
I'll deign to respond for once rather than mod. Let me preface this as saying I've observed Mr. Trump (I won't stoop to calling him weird names), for well over 35 years (both as a born and raised New Yorker from NYC, and as educated, functioning adult for the 23 years). I'll start with what I like.
1) He gets most of the public tasks he states done
2) He's a fighter (all self-respecting NYers, and probably the country as a whole or in part respects that).
3) He is arguably one of the most effective presidents to ever take office (in terms of achieving his agenda).
4) He was a key component in truly ending the Korean war
Here's what I don't like:
1) He's a bully. Mr. Trump claims to know how to make a deal, but his "deals" seem akin to a mobster boss telling someone they are going to make an offer they can't refuse.
2) He's reckless (like a bull in a china store). I'm not sure Mr. Trump fully understands that we are 1 country in the world and not the world itself. Whether its good or bad, the world is interconnected and interdependent in ways both obvious and subtle. I'm not saying we have to adopt other countries ways or kiss their collective butts, but the word diplomacy implies a certain level of negotiation and finesse and I'm sorry our leader lacks these skills. Furthermore, history as shown many great civilizations who fell due to feeling they were above all others. One can be firm and polite, i.e. non-antagonistic.
3) He nurses personal grudges: I've never seen a president in our history get into grudge match after grudge match over the most trivial things. No one has ever said the news is perfect. You cannot use it as a definitive source (or primary source) of information (at least rather you should not). And I understand the liberal media is hard on him, just like the conservative media was hard on President Obama; however it is the nature of the job, that you volunteered and / or paid for.
Could I go deeper, yep. Do I like him, I don't know him personally to like or dislike him. He is an enigma at best and a catastrophe at worse. One thing I am seeing and its probably not a good thing is the goodwill that has been built up over many decades is being ripped apart because of his personal grudges and I'm definitely certain that we haven't even felt the fallout of that yet.
Regards,
MBC1977,
> Fact is, those people producing a letter after the fact, means...nothing to the merits of the claim, but your citing such a letter, as if it meant something when it has zero legitimate value,
I know you're just an NPC and all your lines are on repeat. I don't care. The fact is that he can get people who know things to back him and even her best friend doesn't know a damned thing about the alleged incident. This, along with the fact that none of the timelines for the story actually work out--the Safeway she made central to her Senate testimony wasn't even *there* in 1982 and Kavanaugh wasn't in town afterwards--shows how this entire story falls apart.
> LOL, nope, Ford's friend does not corroborate any such denial, she sent a letter expressly rejecting that misrepresentation. And yes, I consider their denial an expected outcome because they don't have the responsibility to admit their drinking parties included conduct that was inappropriate.
I saw that. I also saw how she ended up being pressured into that. The fact that she can't help pin down where & when this happened, even after being "reminded" about it is telling. The biggest thanks has to go to Avenatti, though. When he added on the wild allegations for free media exposure, he really helped to lampshade this. It was hilarious watching him deny being pranked by 4-chan. I wonder if the rumors that he flipped are actually true? I mean, he really does seem like the type of sleaze who only cares about money...
> Go watch the video again, the C-span version is on Youtube. Pay attention to how he doesn't respond to questioned accurately, pay attention to his demeanor and temperament.
I did. He's pissed off that this was a well-prepared lie. This wasn't some random off-the-cuff allegation, this was, in fact, calculated revenge with most of the MSM on board. Though it was amazing to see some "news" departments run stories about this with what appeared to be lawyer-driven rewrites to avoid defamation lawsuits later, given that they kept writing stories about not being able to corroborate anything whatsoever about the story.
This is part of why she'd like to drop the matter now. I'm not convinced they will let her do that, though. Ideally, all the records she refused to hand over will be seized and she will be charged with perjury. It's funny you raise this point, there was a great body language expert reading Ford, pointing out how she was being manipulative.
You don't get to attack someone with a fake hit job like this and then disqualify them for being mad about it. I can see why you would not want a pissed-off judge on the court, but that's a problem of your own making. I'm not going to disqualify everyone you piss off. I will laugh when the same standard is used against you, though. There's some chance they might go after her for perjury. That will be *very* entertaining. I'd love to see them appeal it to the Supreme Court. Justice Thomas could write the majority opinion...
> Now you're trying to bring that up? Man, you really do like to undercut your own arguments for some reason. Here's a hint: They have to deal with it. It's a fact of life.
Let's be clear about the context of this quote: you're excusing death threats here. True threats are one of a very few actual exceptions to free speech. Yes, I realize that it's par for the course against leftists. I saw /r/LateStageCapitalism talking about this as the time to be violent and decrying pacifists in their midst. I saw /r/ChaposTrapHouse talking about "baseball" -- that is, wanting more events like when some unhinged person went to the Congressional Republican's baseball game and tried to murder them.
Thank you for being clear that you will violently murder anyone you disagree with for that crime. It helps make our choices clear. Conversely, I have no intention of hurting anyone that does not first threaten me with violence. And no, I don't mean that BS where words are "vio
Three witnesses named by Dr. Ford deny her claim. NONE of them even remember the party happened in the first place - which makes any actions that happened at the alleged party doubtful. NO ONE has confirmed the party even took place. Hard to have an assault when there isn't even a party at which the assault allegedly took place.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
He was confirmed with more bipartisanship than Obamacare... Just sayin...;)
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
LOL... "100% for sure" And you just know this...how? Psychic? BK hasn't lied about his drinking habits, he was quite transparent about them in fact, unless you believe more unverified people paid by Avenatti or CNN to come out and say otherwise. Again, what proof? This is a ridiculous character assassination to paint him as an alcoholic. And what about Ford's own inconsistencies? Or Swetnick's utterly absurd claims? You buy those too? -that Kavanaugh was part of a roving rape gang but she kept attending those parties without telling anyone? There's little to no logic in any of these arguments. You want to screw over an innocent man because somehow you believe he'll single-handedly overturn Roe vs Wade, that's what this is all about. Which he can't do even if he wanted to, and he doesn't. WTF is wrong with you??
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.