They've been called free speech advocates and far-right extremists. Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux's Auckland talk was cancelled after the venue pulled ...

What a creepy, impish ("an evil spirit") person the invisible interviewer is.

loading...
Feminism is Leaving Sad, Unmarried And Childless Women In Its Path Get RIPPED & Gain ENERGY with Coca Tea https://cocateaexpress.com Nord VPN Get 75% off a 3...

Ask not for whom the biological clock tolls; it tolls for thee.

loading...

Domineering father and military school is a recipe for preventing later 'traumatization'.

loading...

Love him or hate him you have to admit that President Trump knows how to get people riled up.

Did Brennan's tweet just signal both his guilt and his defense at trial? (And a tinge of weariness and resignation?)

loading...

President Trump's decision giving Attorney General William Barr "full and complete authority" to declassify documents related to surveillance activities during the 2016 campaign has set off a wave of criticism in Washington.

...if you have nothing to hide...

loading...

The attorney general’s ability to declassify intelligence could put at risk a C.I.A. informant close to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

Risk? The NYT has already given him up.

Or, since the source "provided information to the C.I.A. about his [Putin's] involvement in Moscow’s 2016 election interference" and there was no such involvement, the C.I.A. organ NYT is making the source up. Any random Russian who dies now will become the "source" that Trump killed with transparency taking all of the collusion evidence to the grave with him.

What happened to all of the experienced C.I.A. people who could credibly pretend they knew what they were doing? Have they all retired?

"As Mr. Coats’ comments suggested, intelligence officials believe the danger of the move by Mr. Trump, was that it could endanger the agency’s ability to keep the identities of its sources secret.

The most prominent of those source among them may well be a person close to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia who provided information to the C.I.A. about his involvement in Moscow’s 2016 election interference."


Edit History

2019-17-Fr 08:17:05 pm

Risk? The NYT has already given him up.

Or, since the source "provided information to the C.I.A. about his [Putin's] involvement in Moscow’s 2016 election interference" and there was no such involvement, the C.I.A. organ NYT is making the source up. Any random Russian who dies now will become the "source" that Trump killed with transparency and taking all of the collusion evidence to the grave.

What happened to all of the experienced C.I.A. people who could credibly pretend they knew what they were doing? Have they all retired?

"As Mr. Coats’ comments suggested, intelligence officials believe the danger of the move by Mr. Trump, was that it could endanger the agency’s ability to keep the identities of its sources secret.

The most prominent of those source among them may well be a person close to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia who provided information to the C.I.A. about his involvement in Moscow’s 2016 election interference."

loading...
DOWNLOAD activity sheets from The It Gets Better Project! https://itgetsbetter.org/QueerKidStuff SUBSCRIBE to QKS+ for early access to new videos! https://qu...

Classroom coupling is a no, no so queerness should be like boxers versus briefs, Ie, keep your pants on.

loading...

Clusterfuck Nation For your reading pleasure Mondays and Fridays Support this blog by visiting Jim’s Patreon Page Not long ago, few Americans of the thinking persuasion might have imagined that such a well-engineered republic, with its exquisite checks and balances, sturdy institutions, and time-tested traditions would end up as so much smoldering goop in a national more »

"Even so, the bad faith of his antagonists exceeds even Mr. Trump’s defects and vices. The plot they concocted to get rid of him failed. And, yes, it was a plot, even a coup. And they fucked it up magnificently, leaving a paper trail as wide as Interstate-95."

loading...

Clusterfuck Nation For your reading pleasure Mondays and Fridays Support this blog by visiting Jim’s Patreon Page A mental health assessment of the Democratic Party suggests that identity politics had lately turned into an identity crisis. Years of staying woke finally produced hallucinations and violent outbursts. It was time to medicate the patient. Enter, stage right, more »

"All of which means that Uncle Joe Biden’s career as the Democratic tranquilizer may have about the half-life of that Xanax tablet. The four pillars of the legacy media — The New York Times, The WashPo, CNN, and NBC — don’t want to touch these stories, but they are already out there, and nobody can stuff them back under the carpet, not even the mighty censors of Twitter and Facebook."

loading...

Pete Buttigieg claimed Thursday that it was unknowable when human life begins, making the issue of abortion too complicated to regulate.

“It’s certainly unknowable in the way that scientific questions are answered, it’s a moral question.”

No. On this planet life begins around 4 billion years ago - virtually as soon as it possibly could - according to current "scientific" "consensus". Through various combinations of buddings and mergings that same life continues to the present time.

Now it seems Pete might be confusing when life begins - 4 billion years ago - with when an individual begins - at conception. At that moment the random meets the accidental and the full code for the 'human' platform is laid down. There is also "scientific" "consensus" for this event though it may not use my terminology to describe it.


Edit History

2019-16-Th 06:16:48 pm

“It’s certainly unknowable in the way that scientific questions are answered, it’s a moral question.”

No. On this planet life begins around 4 billion years ago - virtually as soon as it possibly could - according to current "scientific" "consensus". Through various combinations of buddings and mergings that same life continues to the present time.

Now it seems Pete might be confusing when life begins - 4 billion years ago - with when an individual begins - at conception. At that moment the random meets the accidental and the full code for the 'human' platform is laid down. There is also "scientific" "consensus" for this event too though it may not use my terminology to describe it.

loading...
Dissenter
connecting...