Photos, vids, etc ....

EmkIXAk.jpeg


Tl;Dr Means file on time or depend on someone to do it for you before your mind slips. Normal length: They denied 30 years of retroactive disability because the victim of the multiple incapacitating (physically and mentally) ailments did not file within the year. However, in all fairness, he didn't just wake up with the ailments so could have filed on time. - they reasoned. They ignored that he could not just imagine the ailments when filing either, that would be fraud. By the time he knew of the disability he was mentally dependent on others - they heard Regardless, he should have filed as soon as he was diagnosed with an ailment that disabled him. Passing the duty of filing to the Doctors of the same agency that caused his ailment. The military. Welcome to the new USSC, where a mentally ill patient has to have the mental capacity to know AND file for disability or depend on those causing the disability to do so. All that "support vets" campaign is just posturing. Although I get why not pay retroactively 30 years of delay. Maybe limit it to 10.
 
I grieve for the adversities, the human miseries of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. But the slim glimmer of hope is that Putin is the linchpin. Turn Putin around and the war goes away.
But it would be irrational to fully expect rational human compassion from a single ruthless dictator.

Arellano v. McDonough:
These 9 ostensibly learned Constitutional scholars, tops in their profession in a population of hundreds of millions, are conspicuous beneficiaries of the young men and women that place life & limb at risk to insure the sovereign stability these 9 SCOTUS "justices *" enjoy.
It is not even plausible that such scholarship can collectively, unanimously turn their backs on those to whom we all owe so much, within our sovereign borders, and beyond. This is treachery, ingratitude beyond even what fiction might imagine.
Arellano v. McDonough is a deliberate insult, an injustice that severely degrades the reputation of the Supreme Court of the United States of America.
Worth noting, the one-year filing deadline for such disability may not be enough time for such military exposures as Agent Orange defoliant, depleted Uranium ammunition, toxic burn pits, and more.

SCOTUSzero.JPG
Public enemy #1? What penalty would be exacted against YOU if you were to impose this same degree of hardship, adversity on our military vets as that imposed by Arellano v. McDonough?

* The Arellano v. McDonough ruling proves "justice" as in "chief justice Roberts" is a title, NOT a guarantee of rightness, decency, conformance to truth and reason. This ruling is not merely a profound embarrassment to the highest law court in the United States of America. The unanimous Arellano v. McDonough is an insult to every U.S. military member in service to our Constitution, our nation, and our People. [part #2 pending]
 
Part #2
U.S. military conscription was suspended during the Nixon administration. Thus the U.S. military is populated by volunteers.
Until Arellano v. McDonough is decisively reversed I urge all U.S. citizens considering joining the U.S. military in any capacity whether by enlistment or commission, to suspend indefinitely.
I further urge all active service and reserve U.S. military members to strongly consider alternate employment options when their current contract expires, or at first opportunity.
Anyone that has taken the following pledge is bound by honor to oppose the institutionalized ingratitude, the supreme insult of Arellano v. McDonough.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

To accept this injustice is to be party to it. "Pledge" and "oath" are practical synonyms. Please do not perjure your pledge to our veterans.
 
You are invited to share your perspective on this ruling here at CitizenVoice.us, or with the traitors directly party to it:


Supreme Court of the United States
1 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543

Telephone: 202-479-3000
TTY: 202-479-3472
(Monday through Friday 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.)

Other Helpful Telephone Numbers

Clerk's Office: 202-479-3011
Visitor Information Line: 202-479-3030
Opinion Announcements: 202-479-3360

https://www.supremecourt.gov/
 
still grumpy on #261

Why the %$#@ must there be a deadline?! They're surviving veterans of U.S. military service. If their health doesn't have a deadline, why should their healthcare? This is a disgrace. "All honor's wounds are self-inflicted." Andrew Carnegie
 
"Florida considers books to be more dangerous to students than assault rifles."

So does Bulwer Lytton!
"The pen is mightier than the sword" Edward Bulwer-Lytton 1839
Click to expand...
No sense in squabbling about it. U.S. presidential candidate Pat Paulsen settled the dispute with incandescent intellectual clarity in the previous millennium. "Guns don't kill people. Bullets kill people." Paulsen
 
Not trying to annoy you S2. I understand the satire in #271.

None the less, looks like Walden (bloke whose name is on the mailbox) has fluid prosthesia.
In frame one it's his left forearm, in frame three it's his left leg.

Other sources of amusement in the cartoon:
- attic dormers are rare in a bungalow. Not enough floor to ceiling distance for adequate living space.
- odd location for a fireplace
- for practical reason the mailbox flag is usually on the right side of the mailbox.
 
S2 #273
I suspect most dog "owners" are splendid.
A few are substantially not.
Sadly, in recent years I've had to shoot several dogs that attacked me, either on my own land, or on public roadway.
Some dog owners seem to think it's adorable when their dogs use the clothing of unwilling others as a floor mat for their dog.

I'm a conservative libertarian.
If you want to own some pick'em up trucks with rebel battle flags in the back window, splendid. Please don't try to run me over with them.
If you want to own some guns, spectacular. Please don't point them at me.
If you want to own some dogs, gargantuan. Please do not allow / enable them to wipe their potentially never washed paws on my clothing.
 
That said, I've told more than one lady I've dated that if the dog hadn't liked them I'd have had serious thoughts about whether or not our relationship should continue.
 
S2 #274
There may be a completely valid point to be made here. I strongly believe #274 is simply libelous. Whether I as the site admin. have a legal responsibility to remove it I don't know. Surely I have a legal right & ethical obligation to refute it.
"There is no hate so vile as christian love."
Click to expand...
Christianity is a religion, manifest in numerous variations.
Any of them carries a capitalized C.
Not sure what the lower-case "christian" refers to.
But if it's FOX5ATLANTA.COM's syle for brandishing its own ignorance, message received.
"There is no hate so vile as christian love."
Click to expand...
Genocide?
Pedophilia?
Those that wish to terminate the human race?
I suspect anti-semitism might be. If nothing else, it's been around longer.

Bottom line:
Going to church once a week does not render one "Christian".

The poseurs that pretend otherwise do precisely the kind of harm demonstrated by #274.
It's conspicuously gratuitous, a common ploy among those that can't advance their agenda legitimately.

I find it very difficult to distinguish the contemptibility of those that would punish a child for her lesbian parents, from those that play along with poseurs, falsely justifying malicious prejudice on the lie of a poseur.

You should know that S2. Your persistent anti-Christian presentations indicate an abiding, corrosive agenda. - Lies will set you free ? - I don't think so.
 
sear said:
S2 #274

Genocide?
Click to expand...

And the "good guy" in the bible decided to drown the entire human race (and all the animals) because he didn't like the way that some of those humans were acting?

For the record, #274 doesn't come close to meeting the legal definition of libel.

And my posts are generally not "anti-Christian" but they're "anti-Christiandom". I believe it was Kierkegaard who first expounded on the difference between Christianity and Christiandom but regardless of who first expressed it, the difference is important.
 
Last edited:
Shiftless2 said:
And the "good guy" in the bible
Click to expand...
As an auto-didact I don't know if there's a more scholarly term for it. But I have personal experience with this type of issue. I consider it a "one point zero" issue.
Those that consider Genesis as version 1.0 can wallow in their self-righteousness.
Those with a slightly more sophisticated perspective can grasp the concept that up until the flood may have been Genesis version zero dot x. The flood itself perhaps ver 0.7

In that context Noah's flood isn't quite the near genocide anti-believers misrepresent it to be. Instead it's merely a part of the development process.
Mortals and anti-believers alike are free to criticize it. Can any of them do better?
Shiftless2 said:
For the record, #274 doesn't come close to meeting the legal definition of libel.
Click to expand...
American Heritage is good enough for me.

li·bel (lībəl)
n.
1. The legally indefensible publication or broadcast of words or images that are degrading to a person or injurious to that person's reputation.

tr.v. li·beled, li·bel·ing, li·bels or li·belled, li·bel·ling, li·bels
To publish or broadcast a libel about (a person). See Synonyms at malign.
[Middle English, litigant's written complaint, from Old French, from Latin libellus, diminutive of liber, book.]
libel·er, libel·ist n.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition copyright ©2022 by HarperCollins Publishers. All rights reserved.

Shiftless2 said:
And my posts are generally not "anti-Christian" but they're "anti-Christiandom". I believe it was Kierkegaard who first expounded on the difference between Christianity and Christiandom but regardless of who first expressed it, the difference is important.
Click to expand...
The persistent anti-Christian theme in your posts over the years is unmistakable. Can't be dismissed as a mere slip of the pen.

There isn't a power on Earth or elsewhere including God herself that can prevent me from sharing and amplifying your contempt and disdain for those that sully the noble principles of Christianity such as "turn the other cheek". BUT !! !!

However:
While the poseurs may outnumber the others many times over, that does not undermine the integrity, the nobility of those that live by the best that Christian theology and philosophy has to offer.
Some of the finest human beings I've ever met have been Christian, even if they didn't wear it on their sleeve.

I join you in exposing the poseurs.
I oppose efforts even if inadvertent, to sully the lot in feeble attempt to insult the bad among them. In my opinion, there's more to being Christian than claiming the honor rightly earned by the few that are. An educated mind should understand that, and reflect it when communicating on Christianity, religion, and humanity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top