*affect

No, still a design flaw. This risk would not exist if they had used a more traditional design. If that church made it impossible to do so, they should have bought the church and demolished it, or built elsewhere, instead of risking lives with that less secure design!

A "simplification of design" that would certainly kill a lot of people counts as an error, no?

The problem isn't the name calling. It is that the name calling actually works on people too lazy to think for themselves. They get their marching orders from whatever talking point memo is out (both Left and Right wing) and march in formation.

And while I don't agree with many people politically, I at least have respect and can converse with people I don't agree with, if they at least have a reason for their political beliefs (wrong or right). I often have common ground with people I normally wouldn't agree with, because my viewpoints are reasoned, and sometimes we have the same reasons for the same views.

Above all, the drones are massive and collectively drown out the reasoned voices. And this is to our own shame!

Or, in other words .... "what could possibly go wrong???"

Which, means, they should be merged and brought back together.

This is the unfortunate case of Open Source failure, and a pretty big one IMHO. The fact that they remain split is huge problem, because now I cannot recommend either, even though they are both decent. I have no idea which one will actually survive and prosper, or which one will die a slow painful death. Merging them is really the only REAL solution for my concerns.

To put it more precisely: Microsoft knew tablets would be big someday... but rather than make a new lightweight OS that was adequate to a tablet, they tried to cram clunky old Windows into the new format. The result was those x86 tablet PCs that were huge, ran crazy hot, and had a completely inadequate interface.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Actually, try changing the things that are "explanations" and you'll start to find that they are also "excuses". Offer up solutions to end the "explanations" and you'll likely get a slew of reasons why it isn't possible, mainly from the very people who profit by keeping the status quo, but have "compassion" for the plight.

If the US ARMY is doing anything against US citizens, it is proof of tyranny, as they are forbidden by current law (posse comitatus) from engaging US Citizens.

And just so you know, I oppose the militarization of law enforcement (giving police tanks and such).
 

The television did.

I guess, if I say I am not a moron you'd still argue, so I won't.

But what I will say is that well armed citizenry can be more than just a bug to be squashed. And yes, I do think that citizens with Paramilitary grade weapons do stand a chance against militarized government agencies. All you have to do is remember what two well armed guys in Hollywood pulled off during a bank heist. Not to mention the Taliban and Iraqi militia people picking off our troops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...

And you've actually helped make my point, the whole point of gun control is for government to control guns. And this is the very thing I am protesting. The whole "there is no need" argument fails right here, because government will always create a "need" to have bigger better guns than citizens. And that is exactly how tyrants control their citizens.

From the sounds of it, you actually support government with big guns and likewise do not believe Tyranny can happen here. Those that do not know history, are doomed to repeat it. Sadly, those of us who do know history are too few to do anything about it.

The problem with the gun control people, is that they fail to realize that they are in fact, not against guns, per se. They are against the people (common citizens) of having guns. They are all for the government having guns.

Lets call it what it is, they don't think the common people need or deserve protection from tyrannical governments, because they mistakenly believe that their government cannot possibly be a tyranny. I would love to round up all these people and force them into "first amendment zones" where we can control their speech, like the government tried to do in Nevada.

The most racist thing I've ever heard, were the liberals whining about black people's "plight", making excuses for the bad behavior being "cultural". It is clearly the most bigoted viewpoint, and it isn't coming from "Tea Baggers", it is coming from the left. And some of the worst, is coming the black/african left. These people are poverty pimps and race baiters who DO NOT WANT a successful Black (see Ben Carson character assassination).

When success is rewarded with hateful words like "Uncle Tom", and "Race Traitor" you can squarely call it "racism". There is no greater racist than those that DO NOT believe black people can be smart, intelligent and successful.

But, instead of taking a close look at the policies that are designed to hold black people captive (slavery??) inside the invisible cages and to be ruled by their plantation masters (voting 80% DNC), we have people calling the wrong side "racist".

The real Racism are those that insist that black people cannot be successful, without a handout.

Like this? http://cinnamon.linuxmint.com/