Best I can discern, it’s a megalithic temple community, not a city. The upper bound of estimates of its antiquity is 11,500 years. I do wonder if they’ve got it dated correctly.
Schadenfreude watch.
The husband of Nancy Pelosi has been arrested in Napa County, California after a head-on collision around midnight in the wee hours of 30 May. The two drivers were quite fortunate they did not suffer any life-threatening injuries. One’s sympathies go to the driver of the other vehicle (a Jeep), who, one assumes, is facing steep replacement or repair costs.
The 82 year old Mr. Pelosi was demonstrating how exquisitely calibrated is his carbon footprint by bombing around in a late model Porsche roadster (retail price is between $65,000 and $220,000 depending on model), drunk. Embarrassingly for him, he crossed paths with a set of state cops who might just be passably honest and expect the nomenklatura to pass their brethalyzer tests if they wish to be let go without incident. Of course, the regime media will not be peppering the Speaker with shouted questions about this.
All those Q & A sessions where she seems to be blitzed or having a stroke now begin to make a certain sort of sense.
Can I be the first here to say “It’s Aliens”.
The assertion that there was no settlement at Gobekli Tepe is out of date. One has recently been found right by the site. This of course just raises the additional question how a hunter-gatherer society without agriculture could create what appears to be a permanent village. Poverty Point, a large Pre-Columbian mound site in Louisiana, raises similar problems. It was built 1750-1350 BC, long before agriculture was practiced in North America.
Doggone it, Shirehome, that’s what I was going to say!
On the vulture motif, an ancient religion (although not as ancient as this) from nearby did ritually place dead bodies out for vultures to consume. This is still Zoroastrian practice. I remember reading in the Times of India about distress in the Parsi community in Mumbai over the environmental damage which devastated the vulture population.
On the Uvalde shooting, a column from Michael Walsh makes some very sensible suggestions. The whole article is worth reading.
— a uniform age of adulthood, including drinking and voting, restored to 21;
–no weapons sales to any male under the age of 21 without a lawful father present who is willing to take legal responsibility for the actions of his child, whether natural or adopted;
–an option to forego college (useless for most young men in the first place, and doubly so today) and instead head directly into a three-year, sexually segregated stint in one of the military services upon graduation from high school or on his 18th birthday.
a uniform age of adulthood, including drinking and voting, restored to 21;
Nope. You should have a staged introduction to adult life. Criminal liability with dispensations for youth, age 9. Freedom to engage in paid employment (subject to parental discretion): 10 for family businesses, 14 generally. End of guaranteed financing for schooling, 14. End of guaranteed financing for schooling absent expulsion for bad behavior, 18.
The mention New Zealand, with a map of Australia. Doesn’t enhance my confidence in the producers of the video.
Doesn’t enhance my confidence in the producers of the video.
Neither does the apostrophe in “Archaeologist’s,” which should be a simple plural noun. Neo would never make a howler like that.
Age to receive a driver’s license, 16. Age above which statutory rape no longer applies, 17. Age to register to vote, 17. Age to actually exercise the suffrage or sign designating petitions, 18 contingent on having paid payroll taxes above a certain thresh-hold, 25 generally. Age to enter the military, 17 in the calendar year when one’s 18th birthday is reached. Age to contract a marriage, 18 with parental approval, 25 without. Age to exercise custody of one’s children, 18 if assigned by the child’s grandparents, 25 generally. Age to purchase or consume liquor – at parental discretion in the home, 18 in the service, 21 generally. Age at which youthful dispensations for criminal liability expire, 25.
Age at which you get to say whatever you damn please: 75 for men, 90 for women.
I’d be OK with raising the voting age to 25 since there’s some evidence that neural development actually continues up to around that age.
From this 2011 NPR interview:AAMODT: So the changes that happen between 18 and 25 are a continuation of the process that starts around puberty, and 18 year olds are about halfway through that process. Their prefrontal cortex is not yet fully developed. That’s the part of the brain that helps you to inhibit impulses and to plan and organize your behavior to reach a goal.
And the other part of the brain that is different in adolescence is that the brain’s reward system becomes highly active right around the time of puberty and then gradually goes back to an adult level, which it reaches around age 25 and that makes adolescents and young adults more interested in entering uncertain situations to seek out and try to find whether there might be a possibility of gaining something from those situations.
So, as expected. Sussman not guilty. The swamp protects its own.
The Sussman verdict is disappointing, but not surprising. It will be interesting if someone files a bar complaint against him now for acting without approval and against the interests of his client. I understand that was his defense. Of course the chances of the DC bar taking action against him are probably close to zero.
Gobekli Tepe is fascinating. If we have found one 12,000 year-old site on earth, there’s a good chance that it was not the only one.
Apparently a DC jury will not convict a Democrat.
Just for you, physicsguy, a physician publishes in Scientific American trying to use quantum mechanics to justify abortion.
Kate, SciAm has been a leftist publication since the early 90s when they went full on board with Jim Hansen and global warming; it’s basically a rag like the NYT or even worse.
Her argument is ridiculous as she tries to justify with QM her own moral contradiction. As Neo often says, such cognitive dissonance is usually not enough to move these people.
So Sussman is found not guilty.
How is it possible that given all the phony-baloney crap invented by the many Trump/Russia conspirators, Durham could not select as his first prosecution a slam-dunk- guilty defendant ?
Is it because it is not illegal to create a fictional narrative to slander and destroy a political opponent?
Or is it because, the conspirators are all so versed in the law, they know how and what to do and not be in violation of any laws?
Anyway, Durham struck out in three pitches at his first at-plate appearance.
Why do I think his batting average will eventually converge around 000 , plus or minus, 000.
So much for equal justice under the law for all.
Sussman was slam-dunk guilty. He was tried in DC. The problem is the jury pool.
John Tyler, I think Durham did select a slam dunk guilty defendant. The DC jury just refused to convict. Good grief, he billed the thumb drives he handed over to the FBI to the Clinton campaign and his defense was, more or less, that he violated the rules of professional responsibility.
People basically turn their brains off when Trump is the subject. Their thinking goes no further than “Trump=bad, therefore the the people opposing Trump=good.” (Or the opposite, frankly.)
Key grafs (RTWT):
‘…Christopher Cooper, the U.S. district court judge who presided over the Sussmann case, has said he was “professional acquaintances” at the Justice Department with Sussmann in the 1990s. The judge’s wife has represented former FBI lawyer Lisa Page since at least 2018. Page was having an affair with and exchanging anti-Trump texts with since-fired FBI agent Peter Strzok during the 2016 election.
‘Despite these ties, Durham did not push for the judge’s recusal. [bold font, mine; Barry M]
‘Cooper was appointed by President Barack Obama following unanimous Senate confirmation. He and his wife were married in 1999, and Merrick Garland, now the attorney general, officiated their wedding.
‘The judge limited some of the evidence that Durham was able to present at trial, including related to the inaccuracy of the Alfa-Bank data pushed by Sussmann, as well as the fact that Joffe had been cut off as a confidential human source for the FBI in 2021 amid the special counsel investigation.
‘The defense team contended that Sussmann had not lied and that even if he had, it had not mattered, claiming Durham was pursuing a conspiracy theory [bold font, mine; Barry M]. A number of FBI mistakes were on display during the trial….’
– – – – – – – –
I’m curious about the line, “Durham did not push for the judge’s recusal” and have been trying to figure out the reason for Durham’s decision on this ever since finding out the most questionable details about HIS WIFE’S connection with Lisa Page.
Was this point ever discussed, here? Or anywhere?…as far as you know….
“…Anyway, Durham struck out in three pitches at his first at-plate appearance….
“…So much for equal justice under the law for all.”
I share the deep frustration; but doesn’t the second statement contradict the first?
Victoria Taft is indeed correct, but to paraphrase the illustrious Hillary Clinton, “What difference will it make?”.
Let’s hope it has already made a difference—on several levels—and will continue to make an even bigger one.
Hoo boy: More on the Uvalde Keystone Kops: “The police chief made the wrong call and the officers acted incorrectly by not going into the classroom immediately. It’s inexcusable. What else is inexcusable is that, days after the attack, the police force in Uvalde has now called for backup. Not just to help with the media frenzy, but to provide protection for the Uvalde police force.
Yes. Seriously. The cops in Uvalde are calling on other law enforcement to protect them. . . . The police who were too afraid to go into a school to stop a school shooter are now too afraid to walk the street without extra protection from the feds and state police.”
Essentially, Clinton, the Democrats, the FBI (et al.)—the SWAMP—is absolutely putrid…but…OTOH…it’s NOT!…
…because YOU can’t prove a thing.
“Might” remind at least some of the “events” of November 2020, mightn’t it?…
…And in various places around the world–GLOBLISM!!—there are Godfathers nodding their heads from side to side…in SHEER ADMIRATION….
…Which may well be the reason why the “Biden” administration—mafiosi extraordinare—is working hysterically to try to prevent a gang war from breaking out.
(Now, gosh, why would “Biden” think that?…Because “he” KNOWS.)
RE: Gobekli Tepe—So far, only 5% of this massive site has been uncovered.
Let that sink in a bit.
Know, as well that, since the excavations at Gobekli Tepi, many other Gobekli Tepi-like sites have since come to light on this same Anatolian plateau, some of them possibly even older than Gobekli Tepi.
How are we supposed to believe that the bands of hunter gatherers who archaeologists and anthropologists tell us formed “society” at this time–composed of small family groups, barely scraping by, by wandering about hunting and gathering–this at a time period before the invention of the wheel (and probably the ideas of the lever and the pulley) devices needed to make any large scale construction feasible, before the invention of writing (which means, as well, likely before any form of mathematical notation), before the invention of the paper which would have made drawing, estimating, planning, and communicating those plans so much easier, especially over the many hundreds of years it is estimated it likely took to construct Gobekli Tepi, before the invention of the pottery needed to cook, store, and transport food stuffs, liquids, and other essentials needed to feed and supply such a huge workforce, before the agriculture and domestication of animals which would have been almost essential to provide the kind of steady and more nutrient rich diets needed to do hard manual labor, before even the first small settlements had developed—were capable of conceiving of, and of performing the calculations, design, and construction work to create Gobekli Tepe.
Moreover, doing this by gathering, organizing, directing, housing, and feeding the great workforce required to build such a large number of enormous and sophisticated megalithic structures over the course of estimated hundreds or perhaps even a thousand years or more?
I’ve written here before that it seems likely that these hunter gatherers “had some help”–had quite a lot of help, in fact–whether from members of some much more advanced predecessor civilization, or perhaps even the Aliens who appear, in one way or the other, in many disguises in many, if not all, of the foundation myths of, it seems, all of our ancient civilizations.
(My own theory is that when they saw those bubbly human researchers filming them they discussed the matter and said, “Hey let’s have some fun and mess with their heads”…)
The #1 item on the agenda when Republicans retake power in DC is to relocate every major agency and department all across the country and relegate the remaining population of DC back to Virginia for electoral purposes. That current environment is eventually going to produce something much, much, MUCH worse than the Sussmann verdict. And the reaction to that might be some dude riding up on a white horse.
Mike
The district originally included a chunk of northern Virginia. That was returned to Virginia prior to 1861. The northern part of the District, other than the immediate Federal area, could be returned to Maryland (and should be, I think).
I don’t think it’s aliens, it’s drinking.
Hunter gatherers don’t get a lot of drinking time without beer or wine. Something allowed them to start getting drunk, and finding out women who are drunk are a LOT easier.
I haven’t yet read Drunk, but plan to.
Just finished great book by Chris Blattman, Why We Fight. The Roots of War and the Paths to Peace. (hint: Roots of War is stronger, with more data, unfortunately obviously). https://tomgrey.substack.com/p/why-we-fight-book-review
As ~ Snow on the Pine ~ above says, there’s more to the story that we don’t know, I learned on this site how to slow the speed down so the guy does not sound so much like Micky Mouse and when he states that there was not agriculture, just hunter gather’s and without much in the way of tools they moved and installed 50 tons of carved stone pillars I thinking there is a lot we don’t know and perhaps in our life time will never know. We do like to think we have all of the answers and it appears there is a lot of missing information, it is a huge old times mystery. Thank you Neo for the video.
I’ve written on this site several times before about my view that UFOs are in fact real physical objects directed by some form of Alien intelligence, and about the current state of play concerning the history of and ideas about these “unidentified” objects.
UFOs which have apparently been observed by us humans over the course of many thousands of years –and perhaps much further back in time than that, back in our human prehistory —each era’s humans interpreting and memorializing these sightings in terms of their culture and their ideas, and given the capabilities they have of describing or making images of what they saw in their time; their “consensus reality.”
I find the “Ancient Alien” shows to be way under-proved and over-hyped, and these shows and those who appear on them more than a little ridiculous, and experts in intellectual “trapeze work.”
However, I don’t believe that the basic premise–that Aliens may have in the past and are today visiting the Earth, and in the past, may have given/taught groups of primitive humans the several tools and techniques, the “jump start” necessary to get them on the road to eventually creating their own civilizations is–given the growing official recognition/admission of the reality of UFOs–that far fetched.
Thus, thinking of the very startling existence and discovery of a 12,000-13,000 year old Gobekli Tepi that is, as of yet, only 5% uncovered, and likely to provide us with an ever increasing number of surprises, it strikes me as fairly plausible–if UFOs are what I think they are—that the occupants of these UFOs may have lent us humans a helping hand, those Aliens then represented in our human art and literature as the angels and demons, the “culture heroes” of each age in which they were encountered.
it strikes me as fairly plausible–if UFOs are what I think they are—that the occupants of these UFOs may have lent us humans a helping hand,
Is there no pathology of the 1970s we are not condemned to repeat?
I keep reading that the cops should have just rushed in. I want to see a pic of the door. If they could have gotten in, how many at a time could have gone through the door. I don’t have enough info to make a judgement yet. Seeing cops standing around outside doesn’t mean that there were no cops inside. Parents wanting to rush in is understandable but would have cause a lot of problems, including them getting shot.
The #1 item on the agenda when Republicans retake power in DC is to relocate every major agency and department all across the country and relegate the remaining population of DC back to Virginia for electoral purposes.
The Virgina portion of the original District was retroceded in 1846. Today’s DC would revert to Maryland. The original concerns which motivated the erection of the District are now anachronisms, so retrocession makes sense. The problem is getting Maryland to take it, as they have a right of refusal.
Only about 20% of the employed population in the 12 jurisdictions around DC works for the federal government, and a certain number are in uniform.
Greater Washington is a 1st tier city. The Democratic Party dominates the metropolitan settlement of nearly all 1st tier cities, with Republicans prevailing only in low-density peripheral suburbs. (I think Phoenix may be an exception among 1st tier cities). With the exception of Atlanta, it is also the blackest 1st tier city. North of 30% of the population in those 12 jurisdictions is black (v. 18% in and among the 19 counties around Manhattan). The somewhat reduced share of the working population to be found in ordinary private-sector employment adds to the effect, but that’s a weaker vector than these other two. (The proportionately large population of foreigners around DC may also enhance the effect as well).
A fairly simple way to ameliorate the DC jury problem is to change the boundaries of federal trial jurisdictions. You could have about 40-odd jurisdictions built of ‘standard metropolitan areas’ and adjacent counties and then subdivide those with the largest case loads (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas) so you had about 50 jurisdictions total. Off-shore territories (bar Puerto Rico) would be circuit stops of jurisdictions headquartered on the mainland. The allocation of judges to each jurisdiction would be determined by a decennial assessment of case loads over the previous decade. Jurisdictions who qualify for additional judges would have immediate vacancies open; those who qualify for fewer would see their population of working judges decline through attrition.
In re Washington, you could have a jurisdiction which consisted of DC, about six counties in Maryland, about 15 counties and seven stand-alone municipalities in Virginia, and a scatter of counties in West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Have every county which is closer to Washington’s downtown than it is to the respective downtowns of Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Richmond. The calculation of the quantum of manpower for the Washington jurisdiction would differ from that of an ordinary federal jurisdiction as it would include that necessary to preside over common-and-garden proceedings in DC in lieu of a state court. If you were successful in retroceding DC, those proceedings would be taken over by Maryland state courts.
===
The judge (perhaps with the assistance of a clerk in the commissioner’s of jurors office) stacked the jury. Ordinarily, only a low-single digit share of the population contributes to federal campaigns. They had four jurors who were Democratic Party donors and a fifth who had a personal connection to the defense counsel. Jonathan Turley said the only way the prosecutor could have gotten a worse jury would have been to have drawn from the DNC employee directory.
Barry Meislin:
I saw the issue of not pushing for recusal discussed elsewhere, although I don’t remember where or by whom. The gist of it is a form of “if you strike at the king you must kill him,” the idea being that if you push for recusal you better be pretty sure it will happen or you just anger the judge and turn him or her further against you.
I don’t know much about how that works, though.
Obviously, what we don’t know far exceeds what we do know.
But what we do know is that a hunter-gatherer society is categorically incapable of producing such a site. The mystery is compounded by the various elements of what we do know not adding up in a coherent fashion.
Arguably, the extinction of any society in which vultures were held in reverence is to be celebrated. That reverence implies a death cult. Support for the argument that some things are better left unknown or forgotten. Like human sacrifice and cannibalism.
PA Cat:
No one has a clue yet whether they were the “Keystone Cops” or not. You have no idea what they were or were not doing, or trying to do, or what the ramifications were. All you – and I – know is that whatever they did or didn’t do didn’t work to get the perp and also get help to those kids in a more timely fashion.
I plan to write a post on this and I was going to already include that “Not the Bee” article you linked, before you even linked it.
That article makes me very angry – but not in the way it’s trying to make me angry. It makes me angry because in Uvalde, backup was called from the very start and many officers (including Border officers) came there from miles away. I read that it wasn’t just 19 either – that’s how many were inside the building. There were others evacuating children, etc., and looking for equipment to get inside the room (they initially had no such equipment). Sorting out what was done right and what was done wrong will take quite some time, but one thing we know is that they called for backup right away.
So the whole premise of that “Not the Bee” story is a lie or an elementary and basic error. And if the Uvalde police are calling for help for themselves now, it’s because of all the propaganda against them – much of IT based on lies – that has caused people to threaten them with death.
I assume you think they are entitled to such protection. I certainly do.
You write:
Yes. Seriously. The cops in Uvalde are calling on other law enforcement to protect them. . . . The police who were too afraid to go into a school to stop a school shooter are now too afraid to walk the street without extra protection from the feds and state police.”
Neither you nor I have a clue whether they were motivated by FEAR or whether it was the fact that they could not shoot into that room without possibly killing kids who were alive, because they would be shooting blind. And they could not enter the room because they didn’t have the equipment.
You also write that the police were afraid to “go into a school.” But they were in the school. They were in the school outside the classrooms involved, and several of them had initially rushed in very quickly as soon as they arrived at the school and gotten to the classroom but the door was locked, they couldn’t get in, and they were shot by the perp through the door. This was all apparently after the children had been shot – there is no indication that children were shot at any time except in the first couple of minutes and before police could get there.
Please get your facts straight. I’ve been writing about this matter for days and if you’ve read the posts these things have already been said. I believe that you are operating on emotion and outrage at the horror of the crime, but that shouldn’t make you or anyone else ignore the facts. Please don’t be manipulated by the media trying to stir up more hatred, this time against the police.
If the police really had a way into that room and could have saved people and didn’t, and those facts emerge, I will join the crowd speaking against them. But that time has not even come close to arriving so far.
“I’d be OK with raising the voting age to 25 since there’s some evidence that neural development actually continues up to around that age.””
Democrats provide a massive amount of evidence in support of the assertion that for many, neural development stops at 15.
“Apparently a DC jury will not convict a Democrat.” Kate
When “jury nullification” is routinely used as a means to obstruct justice, rather than as an occasional means to correct injustice, it becomes a two way street. Its destination is the end of the rule of law and the return of might makes right.
MBunge,
“The #1 item on the agenda when Republicans retake power in DC is to relocate every major agency and department all across the country and relegate the remaining population of DC back to Virginia for electoral purposes.
Upon what basis do you imagine that the leadership of the Republican Party has any desire whatsoever to address the issue?
“I keep reading that the cops should have just rushed in. I want to see a pic of the door.” SHIREHOME
That brings to mind another aspect. Reportedly, before the killer was shot and killed, some of the children in the school were rescued by being brought out of other classroom’s windows.
If so that raises two questions; did either of the two rooms in which the killer had entered have windows as well? If so, why not shoot out them (aiming up to avoid hitting innocents) and throw tear gas canisters in before entering the room?
And if a bunch of cops were just outside the classroom door for 30-60 minutes, why the need to get students out through windows?
Geoffrey Britain:
I’ve read so much about this case that I can’t link to the source of each thing I recall. In this case, I don’t know where I read or heard it, so I can’t couch for the veracity of it at the moment. But I read or heard that they tried to get in through the windows and they also shot at the windows (although they couldn’t shoot blindly at the windows) but the gunman shot at them. Even aiming up, I believe you can’t control where the shots go and kids can be hurt by ricocheting bullets. I’m not a firearms expert or even close, but I’ve read that in other contexts.
The perp had the most control of the situation. He knew they were either at the door or at the windows, and could hear their efforts at either end. The officers knew that if they started climbing in through windows they would almost undoubtedly be shot and that the perp could hide behind tables and the like while shooting and could pick them off. Again, I’m not sure of the details and I don’t know if any of this is true, but it seems plausible to me because the children in other classrooms were being evacuated through other windows by other officers from various agencies during the standoff, while all this was happening.
I have also read the officers did not have access to tear gas canisters. Whether or not they were trying to get them I do not know.
Geoffrey Britain:
I also am not sure I understand the meaning of your question, “And if a bunch of cops were just outside the classroom door for 30-60 minutes, why the need to get students out through windows?”
Those were other classrooms from which students were evacuated through windows durig the standoff, as far as I know. The school only has one story, not two. So why go into the school and risk encountering the possibility of a second gunman (I’m not certain whether they knew for sure there was just one gunman) when it would be a pretty simple matter to go to classrooms that didn’t seem to have any problem at that point, and to break windows and take children out.
neo,
“There were others evacuating children, etc., and looking for equipment to get inside the room (they initially had no such equipment).”
That raises some other questions.
Why so long, at least 30 minutes, before getting the Principal to open the door(s)? As soon as the on scene cops discovered the locked door, the natural reaction would be to see who had the keys. It defies common sense to assume that only the teachers within the room had a key. We know the Principal was on scene and talking to at least cops outside the school, if not inside. All the cops had radios. Asking the Principal for the keys was obvious. No need to break down a door when a key is available.
We also know that not long ago the Uvalde cops had conducted school shooting drills. Wouldn’t that necessitate familiarity with the school’s layout?
We know there were two rooms with two outer doors with a connecting door. Were the outer doors of strong metal construction? If so, once partially opened, they would act both as concealment and as a shield from which police could return fire.
Why limit breaching to just one entrance rather than hitting the killer from two directions? If opened simultaneously, the cops would instantly realize in which room held the killer. They’d then have him in a crossfire. Attacking him from what in effect for him was an unanticipated direction.
It doesn’t take special training to assess the obstacles and advantages the situation offered. The cops on scene would have quickly grasped them, if they were motivated to save as many children as possible.
Yes, the police chief ordered them to refrain from breaching the room(s). Yet early on, the cops outside the classroom had to hear more shots being fired within the room. So, regardless of the official line, they knew it was still an active shooter situation.
In which case, just following orders did not cut it and no other honorable option remained but to disobey the police chief’s orders. Putting the possible loss of their job first, arguably morally if not legally, in effect made them complicit in the loss of lives after they’d arrived.
Any cops who can live with the moral consequences of their inactions, demonstrate their unfitness to be participants in the “thin blue line” that protects civilization from the barbarians.
Neo,
The killer was not coming out the door with all those cops standing outside. Apparently they got there fairly fast after the killer had entered the classroom and locked the door. Before they gathered at the schoolroom door, they would have first determined that either there was only one killer or that all were within the schoolroom. You don’t stand around outside a door with a killer inside if there’s any possibility of another killer nearby but undiscovered.
In any case once more than a cop or two was outside the room there was no need to evacuate children out of schoolroom windows.
Evacuating the remaining students out of the two(?) school entrances would not have required them to pass by the room(s) in which the killer was locked.
Geoffrey Britain:
I never said the killer was coming out the door with all the cops there. Initially, though, there were not 19 cops; there were far fewer (I’ve read different reports – two or perhaps three, and then slightly later seven). The initial fear was that if he killed or disabled them (especially when there were fewer; he had already grazed them) then he would come out the door, take their weapons, and go on to other classrooms.
Police later said that the whole time police were in the hallway there was no firing by the perp except at them. Also, I have yet to read anything that addresses whether they ever got word of the 911 calls; however, I have read that investigators are still trying to determine that. It would matter, as well, in terms of what police knew about wounded children versus dead children versus unharmed children, and the numbers involved.
I still don’t get your point about the windows. Why would it matter if the children were evacuated through windows or doors? They were evacuated by officers – I haven’t read an exact breakdown of the officers involved in that effort, but I’ve read that some were Border officers and some were other police.
The school had only one story. My guess is that it seemed simpler and less risky to use windows rather than doors.
And now something we thought we “knew” turns out to be inaccurate. The teacher at the Uvalde school did NOT leave the back door propped open. She saw the shooter jump the fence, and ran back into the school, kicking away the rock she’d used to prop it open and closing the door firmly. It should have locked automatically. It didn’t.
They did not get the key from the principal. They got it from the janitor. Neither you nor I have a clue when they started asking for a key, or where the janitor was. Was he hard to find or easy? I have read enormous numbers of reports and listened to many videos and have never seen anyone address that question, although I’ve certainly wondered about the answer.
Obviously, if they didn’t ask till later, that’s a huge error. But I have no reason to believe that’s the case. If you have a link that addresses the question, please offer it. Till then understand that you are making assumptions about which you are ignorant.
I think the police already knew which classroom the perp was in. It was the one he was firing from. The testimony from one girl who called 911 many times was that he never returned to the other classroom.
Also, you write: “Why limit breaching to just one entrance rather than hitting the killer from two directions? If opened simultaneously, the cops would instantly realize in which room held the killer.”
They didn’t breach anything. They had no tools to do so. From what I’ve read, it appears that once the tools arrived (and those tools were primarily the keys, so the doors were never “breached” at all – they were opened – as well as the ballistic shields for protection) the doors were opened and the perp was killed.
Obviously, if the police made no attempt to find the keys – that would be awful, whatever the orders were. Or if the keys were found earlier as well as shields and not used – also awful. But we don’t know any of that. Some day we might have answers, but as yet we don’t.
Kate:
Astounding. But it shouldn’t be surprising.
In this matter, what people think they know is often wrong. And it might change again – in fact, plenty of things we think we know will probably change again. It’s that “fog of war” thing, and MSM reporting before the facts are ascertained.
That’s exactly why I hold back from condemning anyone yet except the perp.
I was not aware that among Geoffrey’s manifest talents that he is trained and experienced in SWAT operations and active shooter situations, not just CQB (military scenarios, such as Delta Force or SEAL Teams).
And of course Geoffrey continues to display the all-knowing moral certainty about the character and actions of those who were actually there.
We are not worthy.
Neo, I too have read enough that linking to supporting reports requires an inordinate amount of time. I can accept that cops may well have fired at the windows to break them.
Schoolrooms generally have false ceilings so the danger of a ricochet is lessened. In firing at a killer there is always the risk of hitting an innocent bystander but in this active shooter situation they knew he was not going for hostages, so it was a certainty that he intended to continue to kill as many children as possible.
Plus, there might still be children shot but alive. So the cops continuing the assault is not just justifiable but necessary.
“The perp had the most control of the situation. He knew they were either at the door or at the windows”
If the cops were treating it as a case of either the doors or the windows, then yes the cops handed over the advantage to the killer.
But tactically, that was not the case.
Attacking on multiple coordinated vectors, concentrating the killer’s attention in one direction is Active Shooter 101.
Again, there were two entrances plus windows from which to attack in whatever room the killer was in and, schoolroom desks are not effective cover. Parts of the killer had to be exposed, you aim for whatever damage you can do, while alert for any opportunity that damage might create to take the killer out.
It really appears that the killer fired a few shots at the police and they backed off, content to just follow orders. ‘Content’ because regardless of how much inner turmoil they may have been feeling they did nothing and… just followed orders.
Bottom line… I find that indefensible.
ABC News reports that the Uvalde Police Dept. and the Uvalde school police are no longer cooperating with the Texas Department of Public Safety’s investigation of the incident.
Will those who are so sure that what they “know” accept that it is just not so?
Why is it a bad thing to shoot first and ask questions later?
In an industrial safety confined space accident why do those who rush in to save a fellow worker very often also die. (The first man down is usually already dead from lethal vapors, it happens very often. The dead would be rescuers don’t think before acting, Geoffrey.)
Consider that the Uvalde murderer may just have wanted to kill some of those policemen, no just children and their teachers. I will never know, do you know Geoffrey?
Geoffrey Britain:
You keep assuming you know much more than you know.
For example, I have read that during the whole thing as many as 80 LEOs arrived (many not local police but other agencies) and they were trying a bunch of things all at once. You don’t know that they didn’t try the sort of things you mention. We have nothing like a full picture of what was going on. We have mostly the MSM putting out sensational reports on information, some of which has been wrong.
See the post I just wrote that deals with a little of this.
Kate:
I had already read that article you just linked, about the assertion that the police have stopped cooperating.
Read it carefully. Among other things, it says: “multiple law enforcement sources tell ABC News.” Who are they? Anyone who actually knows anything about it? Anonymous law enforcement sources – and to ABC? It might be true or it might not. It’s not the sort of report I tend to trust right at the outset.
It also says this: “Reached by ABC News, a spokesperson for the Texas Department of Public Safety said, ‘The Uvalde Police Department and Uvalde CISD Police have been cooperating with investigators. The chief of the Uvalde CISD Police provided an initial interview but has not responded to a request for a follow-up interview with the Texas Rangers that was made two days ago.'”
That’s one person and one request, and we don’t know whether he’s not responded because he’s swamped with other things right now and will ultimately respond. But that official quote says that the police have been cooperating.
OK I had read that they got the key from the Principal but its somewhat irrelevant that they got it from the janitor. He was on scene and the police would have immediately evacuated everyone outside that room. As potential witnesses, they’d have been directed by the police outside to a holding area. As soon as the cops discovered the locked door, questioning where a key was located and who would have them is obvious and the gathered adults from the school questioned. Cops outside the door would radio the cops outside the school to find out from the school’s employees.
None of this is assumptive, it is logically obvious. The Uvalde cops had conducted school shooter drills, the methods deployed to address school shooters has been established at least since Columbine.
In an active shooter situation, breaching by force or with a key is the same because what counts is passing through any barrier that prevents engagement of the perp.
Geoffrey Britain:
You write that the janitor was on scene. But I have never read that, and you don’t offer a link.
Nor do we know when they asked the janitor and how hard it was to find the key. Should have asked right away and should have been easy, but we don’t know.
You are indeed making assumptions about things you don’t know. If you have a link to the fact that the janitor was right there and easily available, and the key was easy to find, then please offer it. It certainly is logical to think those things would or should be the case, but we don’t know. Things can be very disorganized and can get more so in a crisis. People sometimes run and hide.
And the word “breach” has the following definitions in common English. They do not appear to include simply unlocking a locked door with a key. I have never heard any other definitions than the ones at that link, although I suppose there may be some technical police or military definitions that include getting a key and simply opening a door. If so, please give a link.
Neo, at least I did say, “ABC News reports,” rather than asserting that the Uvalde units are not cooperating. The Texas DPS chief did say that the Uvalde decision not to go in sooner was “wrong.” This might very well make the local units want to step very carefully.
Kate:
Yes, I assume they would feel a judgment of “guilty” had already been made and announced publicly even though the investigation is hardly complete.
Neo,
What we know is that many witnesses have repeatedly stated that the cops outside stood around at leisure doing nothing substantive.
So much so that parents were screaming at the cops to “do something!” So much so that some parents were so frustrated with the cops inaction that the cops in reaction to that frustration tackled and handcuffed one parent and pepper sprayed and arrested another.
We also know that the cops in the building were simply standing outside the door. Presumably waiting for orders of what next to do. Perhaps they were waiting for shields but if so, that was a decision to allow the slaughter to continue out of a concern for their personal safety because in that situation, just following orders doesn’t cut it.
Again, those cops had other options than waiting for a shield(s) and entering through one door. Even then the Border Swat team had to disobey the order to stand down. That is not the MO of police desiring to confront a killer to save the lives of children.
Getting the key was the simplest and fastest way to enter to engage the killer. Entering through both entrances is obvious and firing through the window(s) in multiple vectors of attack gave the cops the best chance to take out the killer with a reasonable degree of risk to themselves. Being a cop carries the acceptance of deadly risk.
Every minute they delayed shortened the minutes remaining to any children that might yet be saved.
Those are not assumptions, those are logical assertions.
Geoffrey Britain:
Once again, we do NOT know what you say we know.
We know some cops – how many? – were outside the building and parents were trying to get in and also screaming that the officers should go in. Those parents didn’t know what was going on with the officers already inside the building. They didn’t know if any were inside and how many were inside and what they were doing and not doing. All they knew is that the children hadn’t been rescued yet, and the parents were desperate and angry – understandably so. But the extent of the parents’ knowledge of events inside was small.
As is YOURS, although yours is a little bigger than theirs was, because you have the benefit of reports in the time since the events occurred. And that is true for all of us at this point. We now know more than those parents did, but not all that much more.
We hopefully will learn more as time goes on, but for now we don’t know the timeline of when each group of officers arrived inside, what they tried, what they failed to try and why, and what resources they had access to. You write: “We also know that the cops in the building were simply standing outside the door.” And you know that how? You saw video? I watched the press conferences and have read countless articles, and I have seen nothing that answers my questions about what was actually happening or not happening, with a detailed and specific enough timeline. Nor have you offered a single link with more detailed information that answers my questions. It’s my impression that that’s because no such link exists.
Kate on May 31, 2022 at 7:40 pm
Thanks for that Kate. I heard something new about that back door, but your article is more informative and is astounding. It makes sense to me as I said previously, that if the teacher is going to run back inside while running away from gunfire, then she is highly likely to close that door.
What to make of the fact that the door did not lock? That the teacher claims that she expected the door to lock when she closed it?
No neo, I just haven’t gone to the trouble of seaching for those links but I do remember reading of it several times.
I’m not just throwing out fevered accusations, but rather examining the actions of what Ive read and contrasting them with reasoned examination. We may never ‘know’ exactly all of the particulars but when the basics point in one direction, critically important extenuating circumstances must emerge to change those basics. Indeed, just the other day you stated that it looked increasingly bad the more you learned…
You’re right that the veracity of reports is always questionable. Most especially the media’s and including reports from the ‘authorities’. Even when they wish to be forthright, often ‘political considerations’ preclude honesty and even actually offer real disinformation, designed to protect vested interests.
The more corrupt the societal institution, the more untrustworthy they become.
A reference to “neolithic hunter-gatherers”. An oxymoron.
But just for grins, do some math. What cubic space needed to be refilled there at the end. Divide by the cubic space taken up by forty pounds of dirt in a wicker basket. How many trips, and where is the source of the fill? Did the original construction leave a huge mound nearby?
I recall somebody doing the math on a Moundbuilders construction. Unbelievable numbers of trips by a necessarily huge number of guys over a heck of a lot of time in which they were producing squat. Who was feeding them? Off the last harvest and maybe done in time to get the next planting in.? Hauling the stuff in the mud and slush of southern Ohio’s winter?
Gobekli Tepe would be exponentially harder.
And that’s not considering the rocks.
It would be interesting to see if a Walmart version of the place can be discovered. A pre-G-T. A practice G-T.
Something got a lot of people organized and either they were all convinced or they were coerced. Coercion requires guys to do the coercing and not the planting.
It is said that the reason for lack of urban centers in North America is that the land is so fat. If some clown wants to set up as Chief in Charge and take your harvest, you move two valleys over. Repeat for three time zones. Was prehistoric G-T an oasis where you had to live in order to live? Or could people move elsewhere and still plant or hunt?
Ninety five percent to go, huh?
Geoffrey Britain:
Your conclusions rest on a mountain of assumptions without evidence. Links are important, facts are important, and you are assuming things without knowing, and then concluding things that might not be true.
Yes, they might be true. But I see no reason to believe they are until I see better evidence than you’ve amassed. And I’m not talking about evidence as in a court of law under a rule that the evidence of guilt must be beyond a reasonable doubt. Right now it’s not even close; there simply isn’t nearly enough evidence, and what we think we have is very faulty.
Well, yeah, boy (dolphins) will be boy (dolphins)…. That’s why it’s probably preferable to swim with the gals…(unless there’s a calf in tow).
(It’s why Flipper was female, actually several females—also less marked up by guy fights…)
Sorry to hear about the rowdiness, though. No doubt every species has its delinquents…
Tommy Jay
Most institutional doors to the outside close themselves and can be expected to do so. But it’s a common experience that sometimes they do not completely come to rest fully in the frame. There are mundane reasons; lack of maintenance, wind blowing through from another open door, and, fitting this situation, the door not opening far enough that the momentum of its return sets the lock. If the teacher shoved it six inches or a foot to reach the rock, then perhaps it was never going to have the momentum to fully close (and lock) itself. Recall that these are designed not to SLAMMM shut but have a dampening mechanism–mentioned by an earlier commenter–which is supposed to reduce the impact of the door returning from fully open. If only slightly open….
If I get the current wisdom, we have cops on the outside getting kids out through windows, some on the inside evacuating kids and staff from other rooms and areas of the school, and a group outside the one classroom owned by the shooter and not going in because it is, for extant intent, an armored door. They either have a Halligan tool, which all fire department groupies know about, but they don’t use it or they don’t have one and for some reason the master key–which nobody needs from one month to the next under ordinary circumstances–cannot be found for nearly a half hour or an hour. Depending on the story.
I’m convinced
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Best I can discern, it’s a megalithic temple community, not a city. The upper bound of estimates of its antiquity is 11,500 years. I do wonder if they’ve got it dated correctly.
Schadenfreude watch.
The husband of Nancy Pelosi has been arrested in Napa County, California after a head-on collision around midnight in the wee hours of 30 May. The two drivers were quite fortunate they did not suffer any life-threatening injuries. One’s sympathies go to the driver of the other vehicle (a Jeep), who, one assumes, is facing steep replacement or repair costs.
The 82 year old Mr. Pelosi was demonstrating how exquisitely calibrated is his carbon footprint by bombing around in a late model Porsche roadster (retail price is between $65,000 and $220,000 depending on model), drunk. Embarrassingly for him, he crossed paths with a set of state cops who might just be passably honest and expect the nomenklatura to pass their brethalyzer tests if they wish to be let go without incident. Of course, the regime media will not be peppering the Speaker with shouted questions about this.
All those Q & A sessions where she seems to be blitzed or having a stroke now begin to make a certain sort of sense.
Can I be the first here to say “It’s Aliens”.
The assertion that there was no settlement at Gobekli Tepe is out of date. One has recently been found right by the site. This of course just raises the additional question how a hunter-gatherer society without agriculture could create what appears to be a permanent village. Poverty Point, a large Pre-Columbian mound site in Louisiana, raises similar problems. It was built 1750-1350 BC, long before agriculture was practiced in North America.
Doggone it, Shirehome, that’s what I was going to say!
On the vulture motif, an ancient religion (although not as ancient as this) from nearby did ritually place dead bodies out for vultures to consume. This is still Zoroastrian practice. I remember reading in the Times of India about distress in the Parsi community in Mumbai over the environmental damage which devastated the vulture population.
On the Uvalde shooting, a column from Michael Walsh makes some very sensible suggestions. The whole article is worth reading.
https://the-pipeline.org/the-column-forget-guns-whatever-happened-to-men/
Prehistory Guys channel interview Dr. Lee Clare: https://youtu.be/16paeSPUIjo
a uniform age of adulthood, including drinking and voting, restored to 21;
Nope. You should have a staged introduction to adult life. Criminal liability with dispensations for youth, age 9. Freedom to engage in paid employment (subject to parental discretion): 10 for family businesses, 14 generally. End of guaranteed financing for schooling, 14. End of guaranteed financing for schooling absent expulsion for bad behavior, 18.
The mention New Zealand, with a map of Australia. Doesn’t enhance my confidence in the producers of the video.
Doesn’t enhance my confidence in the producers of the video.
Neither does the apostrophe in “Archaeologist’s,” which should be a simple plural noun. Neo would never make a howler like that.
Age to receive a driver’s license, 16. Age above which statutory rape no longer applies, 17. Age to register to vote, 17. Age to actually exercise the suffrage or sign designating petitions, 18 contingent on having paid payroll taxes above a certain thresh-hold, 25 generally. Age to enter the military, 17 in the calendar year when one’s 18th birthday is reached. Age to contract a marriage, 18 with parental approval, 25 without. Age to exercise custody of one’s children, 18 if assigned by the child’s grandparents, 25 generally. Age to purchase or consume liquor – at parental discretion in the home, 18 in the service, 21 generally. Age at which youthful dispensations for criminal liability expire, 25.
Age at which you get to say whatever you damn please: 75 for men, 90 for women.
I’d be OK with raising the voting age to 25 since there’s some evidence that neural development actually continues up to around that age.
From this 2011 NPR interview: AAMODT: So the changes that happen between 18 and 25 are a continuation of the process that starts around puberty, and 18 year olds are about halfway through that process. Their prefrontal cortex is not yet fully developed. That’s the part of the brain that helps you to inhibit impulses and to plan and organize your behavior to reach a goal.
And the other part of the brain that is different in adolescence is that the brain’s reward system becomes highly active right around the time of puberty and then gradually goes back to an adult level, which it reaches around age 25 and that makes adolescents and young adults more interested in entering uncertain situations to seek out and try to find whether there might be a possibility of gaining something from those situations.
So, as expected. Sussman not guilty. The swamp protects its own.
The Sussman verdict is disappointing, but not surprising. It will be interesting if someone files a bar complaint against him now for acting without approval and against the interests of his client. I understand that was his defense. Of course the chances of the DC bar taking action against him are probably close to zero.
Gobekli Tepe is fascinating. If we have found one 12,000 year-old site on earth, there’s a good chance that it was not the only one.
Apparently a DC jury will not convict a Democrat.
Just for you, physicsguy, a physician publishes in Scientific American trying to use quantum mechanics to justify abortion.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-quantum-mechanics-can-teach-us-about-abortion/?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1653453604
Kate, SciAm has been a leftist publication since the early 90s when they went full on board with Jim Hansen and global warming; it’s basically a rag like the NYT or even worse.
Her argument is ridiculous as she tries to justify with QM her own moral contradiction. As Neo often says, such cognitive dissonance is usually not enough to move these people.
So Sussman is found not guilty.
How is it possible that given all the phony-baloney crap invented by the many Trump/Russia conspirators, Durham could not select as his first prosecution a slam-dunk- guilty defendant ?
Is it because it is not illegal to create a fictional narrative to slander and destroy a political opponent?
Or is it because, the conspirators are all so versed in the law, they know how and what to do and not be in violation of any laws?
Anyway, Durham struck out in three pitches at his first at-plate appearance.
Why do I think his batting average will eventually converge around 000 , plus or minus, 000.
So much for equal justice under the law for all.
Sussman was slam-dunk guilty. He was tried in DC. The problem is the jury pool.
John Tyler, I think Durham did select a slam dunk guilty defendant. The DC jury just refused to convict. Good grief, he billed the thumb drives he handed over to the FBI to the Clinton campaign and his defense was, more or less, that he violated the rules of professional responsibility.
People basically turn their brains off when Trump is the subject. Their thinking goes no further than “Trump=bad, therefore the the people opposing Trump=good.” (Or the opposite, frankly.)
Turley/Techno Fog:
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/hillary-lawyer-sussman-acquitted-lying-fbi-russia-hoax-farce
Continued:
“Sussmann found not guilty in blow to John Durham’s investigation”—
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/sussmann-found-not-guilty-in-blow-to-john-durhams-investigation
Key grafs (RTWT):
‘…Christopher Cooper, the U.S. district court judge who presided over the Sussmann case, has said he was “professional acquaintances” at the Justice Department with Sussmann in the 1990s. The judge’s wife has represented former FBI lawyer Lisa Page since at least 2018. Page was having an affair with and exchanging anti-Trump texts with since-fired FBI agent Peter Strzok during the 2016 election.
‘Despite these ties, Durham did not push for the judge’s recusal. [bold font, mine; Barry M]
‘Cooper was appointed by President Barack Obama following unanimous Senate confirmation. He and his wife were married in 1999, and Merrick Garland, now the attorney general, officiated their wedding.
‘The judge limited some of the evidence that Durham was able to present at trial, including related to the inaccuracy of the Alfa-Bank data pushed by Sussmann, as well as the fact that Joffe had been cut off as a confidential human source for the FBI in 2021 amid the special counsel investigation.
‘The defense team contended that Sussmann had not lied and that even if he had, it had not mattered, claiming Durham was pursuing a conspiracy theory [bold font, mine; Barry M]. A number of FBI mistakes were on display during the trial….’
– – – – – – – –
I’m curious about the line, “Durham did not push for the judge’s recusal” and have been trying to figure out the reason for Durham’s decision on this ever since finding out the most questionable details about HIS WIFE’S connection with Lisa Page.
Was this point ever discussed, here? Or anywhere?…as far as you know….
“…Anyway, Durham struck out in three pitches at his first at-plate appearance….
“…So much for equal justice under the law for all.”
I share the deep frustration; but doesn’t the second statement contradict the first?
And searching for some solace from the ashes of this defeat….
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2022/05/31/breaking-sussmann-acquitted-of-lying-to-fbi-in-trump-russia-hoax-delivering-big-loss-to-special-counsel-durham-n1602172
H/T Instapundit.
Victoria Taft is indeed correct, but to paraphrase the illustrious Hillary Clinton, “What difference will it make?”.
Let’s hope it has already made a difference—on several levels—and will continue to make an even bigger one.
Hoo boy: More on the Uvalde Keystone Kops: “The police chief made the wrong call and the officers acted incorrectly by not going into the classroom immediately. It’s inexcusable. What else is inexcusable is that, days after the attack, the police force in Uvalde has now called for backup. Not just to help with the media frenzy, but to provide protection for the Uvalde police force.
Yes. Seriously. The cops in Uvalde are calling on other law enforcement to protect them. . . . The police who were too afraid to go into a school to stop a school shooter are now too afraid to walk the street without extra protection from the feds and state police.”
https://notthebee.com/article/the-uvalde-police-force-called-for-backup-last-week-from-texas-law-enforcement-to-provide-security-for-the-cops
“…searching for some solace from the ashes…”, continued:
Here’s Byron York:
“What Durham proved”—
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/what-durham-proved
H/T Powerline blog.
Essentially, Clinton, the Democrats, the FBI (et al.)—the SWAMP—is absolutely putrid…but…OTOH…it’s NOT!…
…because YOU can’t prove a thing.
“Might” remind at least some of the “events” of November 2020, mightn’t it?…
…And in various places around the world–GLOBLISM!!—there are Godfathers nodding their heads from side to side…in SHEER ADMIRATION….
…Which may well be the reason why the “Biden” administration—mafiosi extraordinare—is working hysterically to try to prevent a gang war from breaking out.
(Now, gosh, why would “Biden” think that?…Because “he” KNOWS.)
RE: Gobekli Tepe—So far, only 5% of this massive site has been uncovered.
Let that sink in a bit.
Know, as well that, since the excavations at Gobekli Tepi, many other Gobekli Tepi-like sites have since come to light on this same Anatolian plateau, some of them possibly even older than Gobekli Tepi.
How are we supposed to believe that the bands of hunter gatherers who archaeologists and anthropologists tell us formed “society” at this time–composed of small family groups, barely scraping by, by wandering about hunting and gathering–this at a time period before the invention of the wheel (and probably the ideas of the lever and the pulley) devices needed to make any large scale construction feasible, before the invention of writing (which means, as well, likely before any form of mathematical notation), before the invention of the paper which would have made drawing, estimating, planning, and communicating those plans so much easier, especially over the many hundreds of years it is estimated it likely took to construct Gobekli Tepi, before the invention of the pottery needed to cook, store, and transport food stuffs, liquids, and other essentials needed to feed and supply such a huge workforce, before the agriculture and domestication of animals which would have been almost essential to provide the kind of steady and more nutrient rich diets needed to do hard manual labor, before even the first small settlements had developed—were capable of conceiving of, and of performing the calculations, design, and construction work to create Gobekli Tepe.
Moreover, doing this by gathering, organizing, directing, housing, and feeding the great workforce required to build such a large number of enormous and sophisticated megalithic structures over the course of estimated hundreds or perhaps even a thousand years or more?
I’ve written here before that it seems likely that these hunter gatherers “had some help”–had quite a lot of help, in fact–whether from members of some much more advanced predecessor civilization, or perhaps even the Aliens who appear, in one way or the other, in many disguises in many, if not all, of the foundation myths of, it seems, all of our ancient civilizations.
For those who like dolphins…(and who doesn’t like dolphins?):
“…Dolphins form orderly queues to use coral as medicine for skin ailments, study reveals”—.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-10836477/Dolphins-form-orderly-queues-use-coral-medicine-skin-ailments-study-reveals.html?ito=chromelessDM_0
(My own theory is that when they saw those bubbly human researchers filming them they discussed the matter and said, “Hey let’s have some fun and mess with their heads”…)
The #1 item on the agenda when Republicans retake power in DC is to relocate every major agency and department all across the country and relegate the remaining population of DC back to Virginia for electoral purposes. That current environment is eventually going to produce something much, much, MUCH worse than the Sussmann verdict. And the reaction to that might be some dude riding up on a white horse.
Mike
The district originally included a chunk of northern Virginia. That was returned to Virginia prior to 1861. The northern part of the District, other than the immediate Federal area, could be returned to Maryland (and should be, I think).
I don’t think it’s aliens, it’s drinking.
Hunter gatherers don’t get a lot of drinking time without beer or wine. Something allowed them to start getting drunk, and finding out women who are drunk are a LOT easier.
I haven’t yet read Drunk, but plan to.
Just finished great book by Chris Blattman, Why We Fight. The Roots of War and the Paths to Peace. (hint: Roots of War is stronger, with more data, unfortunately obviously).
https://tomgrey.substack.com/p/why-we-fight-book-review
As ~ Snow on the Pine ~ above says, there’s more to the story that we don’t know, I learned on this site how to slow the speed down so the guy does not sound so much like Micky Mouse and when he states that there was not agriculture, just hunter gather’s and without much in the way of tools they moved and installed 50 tons of carved stone pillars I thinking there is a lot we don’t know and perhaps in our life time will never know. We do like to think we have all of the answers and it appears there is a lot of missing information, it is a huge old times mystery. Thank you Neo for the video.
I’ve written on this site several times before about my view that UFOs are in fact real physical objects directed by some form of Alien intelligence, and about the current state of play concerning the history of and ideas about these “unidentified” objects.
UFOs which have apparently been observed by us humans over the course of many thousands of years –and perhaps much further back in time than that, back in our human prehistory —each era’s humans interpreting and memorializing these sightings in terms of their culture and their ideas, and given the capabilities they have of describing or making images of what they saw in their time; their “consensus reality.”
I find the “Ancient Alien” shows to be way under-proved and over-hyped, and these shows and those who appear on them more than a little ridiculous, and experts in intellectual “trapeze work.”
However, I don’t believe that the basic premise–that Aliens may have in the past and are today visiting the Earth, and in the past, may have given/taught groups of primitive humans the several tools and techniques, the “jump start” necessary to get them on the road to eventually creating their own civilizations is–given the growing official recognition/admission of the reality of UFOs–that far fetched.
Thus, thinking of the very startling existence and discovery of a 12,000-13,000 year old Gobekli Tepi that is, as of yet, only 5% uncovered, and likely to provide us with an ever increasing number of surprises, it strikes me as fairly plausible–if UFOs are what I think they are—that the occupants of these UFOs may have lent us humans a helping hand, those Aliens then represented in our human art and literature as the angels and demons, the “culture heroes” of each age in which they were encountered.
it strikes me as fairly plausible–if UFOs are what I think they are—that the occupants of these UFOs may have lent us humans a helping hand,
Is there no pathology of the 1970s we are not condemned to repeat?
I keep reading that the cops should have just rushed in. I want to see a pic of the door. If they could have gotten in, how many at a time could have gone through the door. I don’t have enough info to make a judgement yet. Seeing cops standing around outside doesn’t mean that there were no cops inside. Parents wanting to rush in is understandable but would have cause a lot of problems, including them getting shot.
The #1 item on the agenda when Republicans retake power in DC is to relocate every major agency and department all across the country and relegate the remaining population of DC back to Virginia for electoral purposes.
The Virgina portion of the original District was retroceded in 1846. Today’s DC would revert to Maryland. The original concerns which motivated the erection of the District are now anachronisms, so retrocession makes sense. The problem is getting Maryland to take it, as they have a right of refusal.
Only about 20% of the employed population in the 12 jurisdictions around DC works for the federal government, and a certain number are in uniform.
Greater Washington is a 1st tier city. The Democratic Party dominates the metropolitan settlement of nearly all 1st tier cities, with Republicans prevailing only in low-density peripheral suburbs. (I think Phoenix may be an exception among 1st tier cities). With the exception of Atlanta, it is also the blackest 1st tier city. North of 30% of the population in those 12 jurisdictions is black (v. 18% in and among the 19 counties around Manhattan). The somewhat reduced share of the working population to be found in ordinary private-sector employment adds to the effect, but that’s a weaker vector than these other two. (The proportionately large population of foreigners around DC may also enhance the effect as well).
A fairly simple way to ameliorate the DC jury problem is to change the boundaries of federal trial jurisdictions. You could have about 40-odd jurisdictions built of ‘standard metropolitan areas’ and adjacent counties and then subdivide those with the largest case loads (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas) so you had about 50 jurisdictions total. Off-shore territories (bar Puerto Rico) would be circuit stops of jurisdictions headquartered on the mainland. The allocation of judges to each jurisdiction would be determined by a decennial assessment of case loads over the previous decade. Jurisdictions who qualify for additional judges would have immediate vacancies open; those who qualify for fewer would see their population of working judges decline through attrition.
In re Washington, you could have a jurisdiction which consisted of DC, about six counties in Maryland, about 15 counties and seven stand-alone municipalities in Virginia, and a scatter of counties in West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Have every county which is closer to Washington’s downtown than it is to the respective downtowns of Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Richmond. The calculation of the quantum of manpower for the Washington jurisdiction would differ from that of an ordinary federal jurisdiction as it would include that necessary to preside over common-and-garden proceedings in DC in lieu of a state court. If you were successful in retroceding DC, those proceedings would be taken over by Maryland state courts.
===
The judge (perhaps with the assistance of a clerk in the commissioner’s of jurors office) stacked the jury. Ordinarily, only a low-single digit share of the population contributes to federal campaigns. They had four jurors who were Democratic Party donors and a fifth who had a personal connection to the defense counsel. Jonathan Turley said the only way the prosecutor could have gotten a worse jury would have been to have drawn from the DNC employee directory.
Barry Meislin:
I saw the issue of not pushing for recusal discussed elsewhere, although I don’t remember where or by whom. The gist of it is a form of “if you strike at the king you must kill him,” the idea being that if you push for recusal you better be pretty sure it will happen or you just anger the judge and turn him or her further against you.
I don’t know much about how that works, though.
Obviously, what we don’t know far exceeds what we do know.
But what we do know is that a hunter-gatherer society is categorically incapable of producing such a site. The mystery is compounded by the various elements of what we do know not adding up in a coherent fashion.
Arguably, the extinction of any society in which vultures were held in reverence is to be celebrated. That reverence implies a death cult. Support for the argument that some things are better left unknown or forgotten. Like human sacrifice and cannibalism.
PA Cat:
No one has a clue yet whether they were the “Keystone Cops” or not. You have no idea what they were or were not doing, or trying to do, or what the ramifications were. All you – and I – know is that whatever they did or didn’t do didn’t work to get the perp and also get help to those kids in a more timely fashion.
I plan to write a post on this and I was going to already include that “Not the Bee” article you linked, before you even linked it.
That article makes me very angry – but not in the way it’s trying to make me angry. It makes me angry because in Uvalde, backup was called from the very start and many officers (including Border officers) came there from miles away. I read that it wasn’t just 19 either – that’s how many were inside the building. There were others evacuating children, etc., and looking for equipment to get inside the room (they initially had no such equipment). Sorting out what was done right and what was done wrong will take quite some time, but one thing we know is that they called for backup right away.
So the whole premise of that “Not the Bee” story is a lie or an elementary and basic error. And if the Uvalde police are calling for help for themselves now, it’s because of all the propaganda against them – much of IT based on lies – that has caused people to threaten them with death.
I assume you think they are entitled to such protection. I certainly do.
You write:
Neither you nor I have a clue whether they were motivated by FEAR or whether it was the fact that they could not shoot into that room without possibly killing kids who were alive, because they would be shooting blind. And they could not enter the room because they didn’t have the equipment.
You also write that the police were afraid to “go into a school.” But they were in the school. They were in the school outside the classrooms involved, and several of them had initially rushed in very quickly as soon as they arrived at the school and gotten to the classroom but the door was locked, they couldn’t get in, and they were shot by the perp through the door. This was all apparently after the children had been shot – there is no indication that children were shot at any time except in the first couple of minutes and before police could get there.
Please get your facts straight. I’ve been writing about this matter for days and if you’ve read the posts these things have already been said. I believe that you are operating on emotion and outrage at the horror of the crime, but that shouldn’t make you or anyone else ignore the facts. Please don’t be manipulated by the media trying to stir up more hatred, this time against the police.
If the police really had a way into that room and could have saved people and didn’t, and those facts emerge, I will join the crowd speaking against them. But that time has not even come close to arriving so far.
Barry Meislin:
It’s not all sweetness and light with dolphins.
Art Deco @ 11:37 & 11:52,
Great satire!
Nonapod,
“I’d be OK with raising the voting age to 25 since there’s some evidence that neural development actually continues up to around that age.””
Democrats provide a massive amount of evidence in support of the assertion that for many, neural development stops at 15.
“Apparently a DC jury will not convict a Democrat.” Kate
When “jury nullification” is routinely used as a means to obstruct justice, rather than as an occasional means to correct injustice, it becomes a two way street. Its destination is the end of the rule of law and the return of might makes right.
MBunge,
“The #1 item on the agenda when Republicans retake power in DC is to relocate every major agency and department all across the country and relegate the remaining population of DC back to Virginia for electoral purposes.
Upon what basis do you imagine that the leadership of the Republican Party has any desire whatsoever to address the issue?
“I keep reading that the cops should have just rushed in. I want to see a pic of the door.” SHIREHOME
That brings to mind another aspect. Reportedly, before the killer was shot and killed, some of the children in the school were rescued by being brought out of other classroom’s windows.
If so that raises two questions; did either of the two rooms in which the killer had entered have windows as well? If so, why not shoot out them (aiming up to avoid hitting innocents) and throw tear gas canisters in before entering the room?
And if a bunch of cops were just outside the classroom door for 30-60 minutes, why the need to get students out through windows?
Geoffrey Britain:
I’ve read so much about this case that I can’t link to the source of each thing I recall. In this case, I don’t know where I read or heard it, so I can’t couch for the veracity of it at the moment. But I read or heard that they tried to get in through the windows and they also shot at the windows (although they couldn’t shoot blindly at the windows) but the gunman shot at them. Even aiming up, I believe you can’t control where the shots go and kids can be hurt by ricocheting bullets. I’m not a firearms expert or even close, but I’ve read that in other contexts.
The perp had the most control of the situation. He knew they were either at the door or at the windows, and could hear their efforts at either end. The officers knew that if they started climbing in through windows they would almost undoubtedly be shot and that the perp could hide behind tables and the like while shooting and could pick them off. Again, I’m not sure of the details and I don’t know if any of this is true, but it seems plausible to me because the children in other classrooms were being evacuated through other windows by other officers from various agencies during the standoff, while all this was happening.
I have also read the officers did not have access to tear gas canisters. Whether or not they were trying to get them I do not know.
Geoffrey Britain:
I also am not sure I understand the meaning of your question, “And if a bunch of cops were just outside the classroom door for 30-60 minutes, why the need to get students out through windows?”
Those were other classrooms from which students were evacuated through windows durig the standoff, as far as I know. The school only has one story, not two. So why go into the school and risk encountering the possibility of a second gunman (I’m not certain whether they knew for sure there was just one gunman) when it would be a pretty simple matter to go to classrooms that didn’t seem to have any problem at that point, and to break windows and take children out.
neo,
“There were others evacuating children, etc., and looking for equipment to get inside the room (they initially had no such equipment).”
That raises some other questions.
Why so long, at least 30 minutes, before getting the Principal to open the door(s)? As soon as the on scene cops discovered the locked door, the natural reaction would be to see who had the keys. It defies common sense to assume that only the teachers within the room had a key. We know the Principal was on scene and talking to at least cops outside the school, if not inside. All the cops had radios. Asking the Principal for the keys was obvious. No need to break down a door when a key is available.
We also know that not long ago the Uvalde cops had conducted school shooting drills. Wouldn’t that necessitate familiarity with the school’s layout?
We know there were two rooms with two outer doors with a connecting door. Were the outer doors of strong metal construction? If so, once partially opened, they would act both as concealment and as a shield from which police could return fire.
Why limit breaching to just one entrance rather than hitting the killer from two directions? If opened simultaneously, the cops would instantly realize in which room held the killer. They’d then have him in a crossfire. Attacking him from what in effect for him was an unanticipated direction.
It doesn’t take special training to assess the obstacles and advantages the situation offered. The cops on scene would have quickly grasped them, if they were motivated to save as many children as possible.
Yes, the police chief ordered them to refrain from breaching the room(s). Yet early on, the cops outside the classroom had to hear more shots being fired within the room. So, regardless of the official line, they knew it was still an active shooter situation.
In which case, just following orders did not cut it and no other honorable option remained but to disobey the police chief’s orders. Putting the possible loss of their job first, arguably morally if not legally, in effect made them complicit in the loss of lives after they’d arrived.
Any cops who can live with the moral consequences of their inactions, demonstrate their unfitness to be participants in the “thin blue line” that protects civilization from the barbarians.
Neo,
The killer was not coming out the door with all those cops standing outside. Apparently they got there fairly fast after the killer had entered the classroom and locked the door. Before they gathered at the schoolroom door, they would have first determined that either there was only one killer or that all were within the schoolroom. You don’t stand around outside a door with a killer inside if there’s any possibility of another killer nearby but undiscovered.
In any case once more than a cop or two was outside the room there was no need to evacuate children out of schoolroom windows.
Evacuating the remaining students out of the two(?) school entrances would not have required them to pass by the room(s) in which the killer was locked.
Geoffrey Britain:
I never said the killer was coming out the door with all the cops there. Initially, though, there were not 19 cops; there were far fewer (I’ve read different reports – two or perhaps three, and then slightly later seven). The initial fear was that if he killed or disabled them (especially when there were fewer; he had already grazed them) then he would come out the door, take their weapons, and go on to other classrooms.
Police later said that the whole time police were in the hallway there was no firing by the perp except at them. Also, I have yet to read anything that addresses whether they ever got word of the 911 calls; however, I have read that investigators are still trying to determine that. It would matter, as well, in terms of what police knew about wounded children versus dead children versus unharmed children, and the numbers involved.
I still don’t get your point about the windows. Why would it matter if the children were evacuated through windows or doors? They were evacuated by officers – I haven’t read an exact breakdown of the officers involved in that effort, but I’ve read that some were Border officers and some were other police.
The school had only one story. My guess is that it seemed simpler and less risky to use windows rather than doors.
And now something we thought we “knew” turns out to be inaccurate. The teacher at the Uvalde school did NOT leave the back door propped open. She saw the shooter jump the fence, and ran back into the school, kicking away the rock she’d used to prop it open and closing the door firmly. It should have locked automatically. It didn’t.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/texas-police-say-uvalde-school-teacher-closed-propped-open-door-before-attack-but-it-didnt-lock
Geoffrey Britain:
They did not get the key from the principal. They got it from the janitor. Neither you nor I have a clue when they started asking for a key, or where the janitor was. Was he hard to find or easy? I have read enormous numbers of reports and listened to many videos and have never seen anyone address that question, although I’ve certainly wondered about the answer.
Obviously, if they didn’t ask till later, that’s a huge error. But I have no reason to believe that’s the case. If you have a link that addresses the question, please offer it. Till then understand that you are making assumptions about which you are ignorant.
I think the police already knew which classroom the perp was in. It was the one he was firing from. The testimony from one girl who called 911 many times was that he never returned to the other classroom.
Also, you write: “Why limit breaching to just one entrance rather than hitting the killer from two directions? If opened simultaneously, the cops would instantly realize in which room held the killer.”
They didn’t breach anything. They had no tools to do so. From what I’ve read, it appears that once the tools arrived (and those tools were primarily the keys, so the doors were never “breached” at all – they were opened – as well as the ballistic shields for protection) the doors were opened and the perp was killed.
Obviously, if the police made no attempt to find the keys – that would be awful, whatever the orders were. Or if the keys were found earlier as well as shields and not used – also awful. But we don’t know any of that. Some day we might have answers, but as yet we don’t.
Kate:
Astounding. But it shouldn’t be surprising.
In this matter, what people think they know is often wrong. And it might change again – in fact, plenty of things we think we know will probably change again. It’s that “fog of war” thing, and MSM reporting before the facts are ascertained.
That’s exactly why I hold back from condemning anyone yet except the perp.
I was not aware that among Geoffrey’s manifest talents that he is trained and experienced in SWAT operations and active shooter situations, not just CQB (military scenarios, such as Delta Force or SEAL Teams).
And of course Geoffrey continues to display the all-knowing moral certainty about the character and actions of those who were actually there.
We are not worthy.
Neo, I too have read enough that linking to supporting reports requires an inordinate amount of time. I can accept that cops may well have fired at the windows to break them.
Schoolrooms generally have false ceilings so the danger of a ricochet is lessened. In firing at a killer there is always the risk of hitting an innocent bystander but in this active shooter situation they knew he was not going for hostages, so it was a certainty that he intended to continue to kill as many children as possible.
Plus, there might still be children shot but alive. So the cops continuing the assault is not just justifiable but necessary.
“The perp had the most control of the situation. He knew they were either at the door or at the windows”
If the cops were treating it as a case of either the doors or the windows, then yes the cops handed over the advantage to the killer.
But tactically, that was not the case.
Attacking on multiple coordinated vectors, concentrating the killer’s attention in one direction is Active Shooter 101.
Again, there were two entrances plus windows from which to attack in whatever room the killer was in and, schoolroom desks are not effective cover. Parts of the killer had to be exposed, you aim for whatever damage you can do, while alert for any opportunity that damage might create to take the killer out.
It really appears that the killer fired a few shots at the police and they backed off, content to just follow orders. ‘Content’ because regardless of how much inner turmoil they may have been feeling they did nothing and… just followed orders.
Bottom line… I find that indefensible.
ABC News reports that the Uvalde Police Dept. and the Uvalde school police are no longer cooperating with the Texas Department of Public Safety’s investigation of the incident.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/uvalde-police-school-district-longer-cooperating-texas-probe/story?id=85093405
Kate:
Thanks. To echo neo:
Who knew that what “we all know” is not.
Will those who are so sure that what they “know” accept that it is just not so?
Why is it a bad thing to shoot first and ask questions later?
In an industrial safety confined space accident why do those who rush in to save a fellow worker very often also die. (The first man down is usually already dead from lethal vapors, it happens very often. The dead would be rescuers don’t think before acting, Geoffrey.)
Consider that the Uvalde murderer may just have wanted to kill some of those policemen, no just children and their teachers. I will never know, do you know Geoffrey?
Geoffrey Britain:
You keep assuming you know much more than you know.
For example, I have read that during the whole thing as many as 80 LEOs arrived (many not local police but other agencies) and they were trying a bunch of things all at once. You don’t know that they didn’t try the sort of things you mention. We have nothing like a full picture of what was going on. We have mostly the MSM putting out sensational reports on information, some of which has been wrong.
See the post I just wrote that deals with a little of this.
Kate:
I had already read that article you just linked, about the assertion that the police have stopped cooperating.
Read it carefully. Among other things, it says: “multiple law enforcement sources tell ABC News.” Who are they? Anyone who actually knows anything about it? Anonymous law enforcement sources – and to ABC? It might be true or it might not. It’s not the sort of report I tend to trust right at the outset.
It also says this: “Reached by ABC News, a spokesperson for the Texas Department of Public Safety said, ‘The Uvalde Police Department and Uvalde CISD Police have been cooperating with investigators. The chief of the Uvalde CISD Police provided an initial interview but has not responded to a request for a follow-up interview with the Texas Rangers that was made two days ago.'”
That’s one person and one request, and we don’t know whether he’s not responded because he’s swamped with other things right now and will ultimately respond. But that official quote says that the police have been cooperating.
So, which is it?
See also this new post.
Neo,
OK I had read that they got the key from the Principal but its somewhat irrelevant that they got it from the janitor. He was on scene and the police would have immediately evacuated everyone outside that room. As potential witnesses, they’d have been directed by the police outside to a holding area. As soon as the cops discovered the locked door, questioning where a key was located and who would have them is obvious and the gathered adults from the school questioned. Cops outside the door would radio the cops outside the school to find out from the school’s employees.
None of this is assumptive, it is logically obvious. The Uvalde cops had conducted school shooter drills, the methods deployed to address school shooters has been established at least since Columbine.
In an active shooter situation, breaching by force or with a key is the same because what counts is passing through any barrier that prevents engagement of the perp.
Geoffrey Britain:
You write that the janitor was on scene. But I have never read that, and you don’t offer a link.
Nor do we know when they asked the janitor and how hard it was to find the key. Should have asked right away and should have been easy, but we don’t know.
You are indeed making assumptions about things you don’t know. If you have a link to the fact that the janitor was right there and easily available, and the key was easy to find, then please offer it. It certainly is logical to think those things would or should be the case, but we don’t know. Things can be very disorganized and can get more so in a crisis. People sometimes run and hide.
And the word “breach” has the following definitions in common English. They do not appear to include simply unlocking a locked door with a key. I have never heard any other definitions than the ones at that link, although I suppose there may be some technical police or military definitions that include getting a key and simply opening a door. If so, please give a link.
Neo, at least I did say, “ABC News reports,” rather than asserting that the Uvalde units are not cooperating. The Texas DPS chief did say that the Uvalde decision not to go in sooner was “wrong.” This might very well make the local units want to step very carefully.
Kate:
Yes, I assume they would feel a judgment of “guilty” had already been made and announced publicly even though the investigation is hardly complete.
Neo,
What we know is that many witnesses have repeatedly stated that the cops outside stood around at leisure doing nothing substantive.
So much so that parents were screaming at the cops to “do something!” So much so that some parents were so frustrated with the cops inaction that the cops in reaction to that frustration tackled and handcuffed one parent and pepper sprayed and arrested another.
We also know that the cops in the building were simply standing outside the door. Presumably waiting for orders of what next to do. Perhaps they were waiting for shields but if so, that was a decision to allow the slaughter to continue out of a concern for their personal safety because in that situation, just following orders doesn’t cut it.
Again, those cops had other options than waiting for a shield(s) and entering through one door. Even then the Border Swat team had to disobey the order to stand down. That is not the MO of police desiring to confront a killer to save the lives of children.
Getting the key was the simplest and fastest way to enter to engage the killer. Entering through both entrances is obvious and firing through the window(s) in multiple vectors of attack gave the cops the best chance to take out the killer with a reasonable degree of risk to themselves. Being a cop carries the acceptance of deadly risk.
Every minute they delayed shortened the minutes remaining to any children that might yet be saved.
Those are not assumptions, those are logical assertions.
Geoffrey Britain:
Once again, we do NOT know what you say we know.
We know some cops – how many? – were outside the building and parents were trying to get in and also screaming that the officers should go in. Those parents didn’t know what was going on with the officers already inside the building. They didn’t know if any were inside and how many were inside and what they were doing and not doing. All they knew is that the children hadn’t been rescued yet, and the parents were desperate and angry – understandably so. But the extent of the parents’ knowledge of events inside was small.
As is YOURS, although yours is a little bigger than theirs was, because you have the benefit of reports in the time since the events occurred. And that is true for all of us at this point. We now know more than those parents did, but not all that much more.
We hopefully will learn more as time goes on, but for now we don’t know the timeline of when each group of officers arrived inside, what they tried, what they failed to try and why, and what resources they had access to. You write: “We also know that the cops in the building were simply standing outside the door.” And you know that how? You saw video? I watched the press conferences and have read countless articles, and I have seen nothing that answers my questions about what was actually happening or not happening, with a detailed and specific enough timeline. Nor have you offered a single link with more detailed information that answers my questions. It’s my impression that that’s because no such link exists.
Kate on May 31, 2022 at 7:40 pm
Thanks for that Kate. I heard something new about that back door, but your article is more informative and is astounding. It makes sense to me as I said previously, that if the teacher is going to run back inside while running away from gunfire, then she is highly likely to close that door.
What to make of the fact that the door did not lock? That the teacher claims that she expected the door to lock when she closed it?
No neo, I just haven’t gone to the trouble of seaching for those links but I do remember reading of it several times.
I’m not just throwing out fevered accusations, but rather examining the actions of what Ive read and contrasting them with reasoned examination. We may never ‘know’ exactly all of the particulars but when the basics point in one direction, critically important extenuating circumstances must emerge to change those basics. Indeed, just the other day you stated that it looked increasingly bad the more you learned…
You’re right that the veracity of reports is always questionable. Most especially the media’s and including reports from the ‘authorities’. Even when they wish to be forthright, often ‘political considerations’ preclude honesty and even actually offer real disinformation, designed to protect vested interests.
The more corrupt the societal institution, the more untrustworthy they become.
A reference to “neolithic hunter-gatherers”. An oxymoron.
But just for grins, do some math. What cubic space needed to be refilled there at the end. Divide by the cubic space taken up by forty pounds of dirt in a wicker basket. How many trips, and where is the source of the fill? Did the original construction leave a huge mound nearby?
I recall somebody doing the math on a Moundbuilders construction. Unbelievable numbers of trips by a necessarily huge number of guys over a heck of a lot of time in which they were producing squat. Who was feeding them? Off the last harvest and maybe done in time to get the next planting in.? Hauling the stuff in the mud and slush of southern Ohio’s winter?
Gobekli Tepe would be exponentially harder.
And that’s not considering the rocks.
It would be interesting to see if a Walmart version of the place can be discovered. A pre-G-T. A practice G-T.
Something got a lot of people organized and either they were all convinced or they were coerced. Coercion requires guys to do the coercing and not the planting.
It is said that the reason for lack of urban centers in North America is that the land is so fat. If some clown wants to set up as Chief in Charge and take your harvest, you move two valleys over. Repeat for three time zones. Was prehistoric G-T an oasis where you had to live in order to live? Or could people move elsewhere and still plant or hunt?
Ninety five percent to go, huh?
Geoffrey Britain:
Your conclusions rest on a mountain of assumptions without evidence. Links are important, facts are important, and you are assuming things without knowing, and then concluding things that might not be true.
Yes, they might be true. But I see no reason to believe they are until I see better evidence than you’ve amassed. And I’m not talking about evidence as in a court of law under a rule that the evidence of guilt must be beyond a reasonable doubt. Right now it’s not even close; there simply isn’t nearly enough evidence, and what we think we have is very faulty.
Entonces
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/ukraine-fires-human-rights-chief-perpetuating-russian-troop-systematic-rape-stories
Well, yeah, boy (dolphins) will be boy (dolphins)…. That’s why it’s probably preferable to swim with the gals…(unless there’s a calf in tow).
(It’s why Flipper was female, actually several females—also less marked up by guy fights…)
Sorry to hear about the rowdiness, though. No doubt every species has its delinquents…
Tommy Jay
Most institutional doors to the outside close themselves and can be expected to do so. But it’s a common experience that sometimes they do not completely come to rest fully in the frame. There are mundane reasons; lack of maintenance, wind blowing through from another open door, and, fitting this situation, the door not opening far enough that the momentum of its return sets the lock. If the teacher shoved it six inches or a foot to reach the rock, then perhaps it was never going to have the momentum to fully close (and lock) itself. Recall that these are designed not to SLAMMM shut but have a dampening mechanism–mentioned by an earlier commenter–which is supposed to reduce the impact of the door returning from fully open. If only slightly open….
If I get the current wisdom, we have cops on the outside getting kids out through windows, some on the inside evacuating kids and staff from other rooms and areas of the school, and a group outside the one classroom owned by the shooter and not going in because it is, for extant intent, an armored door. They either have a Halligan tool, which all fire department groupies know about, but they don’t use it or they don’t have one and for some reason the master key–which nobody needs from one month to the next under ordinary circumstances–cannot be found for nearly a half hour or an hour. Depending on the story.
I’m convinced