Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rolan7]

Just caught up from page 82.  Jeez you guys...
That was fantastic!  Thank you!  Really.

[Sergarr]

So remember that botched Yemen raid? Apparently, Trump only agreed to it because the operation planners have told him that "Obama wouldn't have done it".

But Defence Secretary, General James "Mad Dog" Mattis, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford, reportedly convinced Mr Trump to go ahead with the raid by suggesting Mr Obama would never have been so bold as to actually go through with it.

They suggested that the death of al Rimi would be a “game changer” in the fight against al-Qaeda, according to a senior White House official.

Cool!

[Loud Whispers]

The absolute mad dog

[Teneb]

So remember that botched Yemen raid? Apparently, Trump only agreed to it because the operation planners have told him that "Obama wouldn't have done it".

But Defence Secretary, General James "Mad Dog" Mattis, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford, reportedly convinced Mr Trump to go ahead with the raid by suggesting Mr Obama would never have been so bold as to actually go through with it.

They suggested that the death of al Rimi would be a “game changer” in the fight against al-Qaeda, according to a senior White House official.

Cool!

Turns out all you needed to manipulate Trump was to imply Obama was too cowardly to do something.

[Starver]

Well, at least it was an attack, and not entirely imaginary...

[PTTG??]

Obama gets to surf again! I never realized he was that into it...

I like the idea of talking about Obama's great vacation instead of Trump for a while.

[Starver]

Branson's gone too far, if he's gone and bought the British Islands... 

[EnigmaticHat]

Well, at least it was an attack, and not entirely imaginary...

He's also included the Boston Bombing and Orlando attack in a list of terror attacks carried out by ISIS even tho both of those were acting alone and while one of them did claim to have joined a terror group, it wasn't ISIS.

Hell, if I'm not mistaken the timeline doesn't even work for ISIS having caused the Boston Bombing.  They weren't even called that back then...

[muldrake]

In other "interesting times" type news---

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-travel-ban-legal-analysis-20170206-story.html

Looks like the Supreme Court might have to decide on exactly what limits on presidential power there are, and how and when to apply them.

If they seriously curtail the president's powers, and return that power back to congress where it belongs, I will be a very happy man. Executive over-reach has been a SERIOUS problem for the past few decades.

Sad it took a raging IDIOT to force people to see it though.

What's more likely is a nearly random decision from the Ninth Circuit, based on which judges are drawn, and then a 4-4 Supreme Court decision which would only result in the lower court decision being upheld with no useful precedent.

[PTTG??]

Or a 5-4 with Trumps appointee swinging it in his favor.

[EnigmaticHat]

It really is assaults on all sides.

I'm not sure our poor public school system can take any more.  It barely survived politicians who were actively trying to help it.

[smjjames]

Well, at least it was an attack, and not entirely imaginary...

He's also included the Boston Bombing and Orlando attack in a list of terror attacks carried out by ISIS even tho both of those were acting alone and while one of them did claim to have joined a terror group, it wasn't ISIS.

Hell, if I'm not mistaken the timeline doesn't even work for ISIS having caused the Boston Bombing.  They weren't even called that back then...

Misinformation aside, they do have a point that attacks in the MidEast and Africa aren't covered as intensely as ones that happen in the West. Their point seems to be more that it's not that they don't get reported, but they sometimes don't get equal coverage. At least in Trump's view.

[PTTG??]

Meanwhile, Betsy DeVos was confirmed after a Pence tiebreaker vote.

As someone attempting to be a liberal EFL-in-China/English-language-arts-teacher-in-USA, it feels like the Trump party is personally attacking me. If it's this bad for someone who happens to share several phenotypes with Trump, I can only imagine how much it must feel like the entire government is against you if you are one of Trump's designated punching bags.

[Starver]

From the full list, I think the main problem is that apparently it is of 'underreported' attacks, or so I interpret their intention.

Orlando?  Boston, as you mentioned?  Charlie Hebdo?  Bataclan? Brussels? Berlin? Russian plane crash?   I can't actually speak for US coverage (who may well have ignored Tunis/Bardo and Souse), especially at the latter end of that short extract of the list, but at least a week of solid follow-up headlines happened with these and others, and often many weeks, months, anniversary coverages...

The BBC's 'self-confessed failures' are:
a Danish man wounded in Riyadh, November 2014 (covered by Reuters)
two US citizens under fire in 'Riyadh', January 2015 (probably a misplacement of an actually reported incident elsewhere)
one US citizen wounded by knife in Karachi, April 2015 (a relatively small incident compared to more serious reports from there)
an arrest of a man in Paris, April 2015 (not exactly a stand-out, SFAICT)
Peacekeeping force camp attacked at El Gora, Egypt, June 2015 (peacekeepers are always targets)
Peacekeeping force camp attacked at El Gora, Egypt, September 2015 (there you go, and the general situation was reported)
Palestinian asylum-seeker attacks policeman in Copenhagen, September 2015 (apart from the trigger words, wasn't even the worst incident there, that month)
It took a while to report Merced, California, November 2015 (student knifes four people, IS 'links' brought up only months after)
Teenage girl 'IS sympathiser' wounds policeman in Hanover, Germany, February 2016 (details given only upon comviction)
Possible failed lorry-bomber supposedly attacks US personnel but fails to injure anyone but himself in Kuwait City, Kuwait, October 2016 (unclear even  if this was an event, a non-event, an accident, etc)
A minor fire in Malmo, Sweden, October 2016 'claimed' by IS (but very little reason to give credance to that)
A 16yo killed by knife in Hamburg, October 2016 (local news only, doubtful connection of this tragic but otherwise not untypical 'normal' crminal act)
Suspected bomb did not explode outside US Embassy, Manila, Philippines, November 2016 (local media promoted IS link, but who knows)
Person(s) unknown fired shots at US Embassy, N'Djamena, Chad, November 2016 (not really so notable, without further knowledge to back it up)

I think I 'forgive' those 'failures', personally.  The number of deaths (or even injuries or 'slight concern for safety') in all those missed items is dwarfed by dangerous driving road traffic accident deaths, unconnected homicides, seasonal flu deaths or whatever, each of which deserves reporting at least as much attention as an issue to make those low rates potentially even lower by education and awareness of the issues.

But that's my opinion..

[misko27]

If they seriously curtail the president's powers, and return that power back to congress where it belongs, I will be a very happy man. Executive over-reach has been a SERIOUS problem for the past few decades.

I'm guessing you are one of the people who think the government that governs best is the one that governs least? Because Congress is the government that governs least. We don't live in some ideal universe discussing abstract notions of checks and balances. The simple fact is that the Presidential powermongering is not nearly as responsible for the rise in executive power as Congressional incompetence. It's an unstated assumption that the different branches of government be territorial and defend their rights and privileges. It's human nature, and the whole point of checks and balances is that each branch exercise it's powers as much as they can. The President is, by this logic, acting entirely as they should. As is the judiciary. The issue is that Congress is incompetent (I want to say "congressional republicans" are incompetent, since they are the ones ceding power to Trump, but surely it's a bipartisan issue in other administrations.) Consider, for example, the case of the Civil Rights Act. When that was struck down, it was struck down on the basis of being outdated, and the Supreme Court directed Congress to update the rules for which states it should apply to. Guess what Congress didn't do? So now the Supreme Court can effectively strike down entire laws without actually doing so. Why? Supreme Court's job isn't to legislate. It isn't on them to fix things. Another example is the Affordable Care Act: That went to the Supreme Court twice purely because of issues that could (and should!) have been resolved legislatively, because they amounted to wording errors. But because it was passed in such an odd way, it wasn't, and Congress refused to pass any sort of law to clarify it, since congressional Republicans would rather have kept it messed up in hopes that the judiciary could do what they couldn't (that being: kill the bill). Congress cedes more power.

Admittedly, Trump is doing a very good job of convincing me that perhaps Presidential power needs a looking at, but I'm not convinced we need to give more power to the least effective branch of government.

REMOVE EXECUTIVE remove executive

*accordion solo*

You laugh, but the way trump is going Americans will learn what it is like to be Serbs on the internet: you either embrace the reputation or you don't talk about it at all.

On the subject of the least effective branch of government, Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer (Schumer today, McConnell yesterday) wrote dueling aritcles in Politico about Neil Gorsuch.