Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,190 Excellent

About Linzz

  • Rank
    Super Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,981 profile views
  1. Supposed to. If Judge Neil Gorsuch wants to pretend the “integrity” of judges should NEVER be questioned, he is not qualified for the Supreme Court. Feb 2017
  2. Listened to O'Reilly occasionally but never really liked him.He was sharp but pretty caustic at times. The off camera video was an eye opener to the environmental culture of self importance that seems to pervade all networks when hosts become celebrities. We just don't know what goes on behind the scenes and all we see is their alter egos. Carlson is OK but occasionally too persistent. Judge Periro is good for a laugh but pretty shrill. One contributor I like is Charles Krauthammer who seems to talk some sense with some authority. The only show I currently watch is the Five because it's humorous, entertaining in it's spats between left and right and it's lightweight but Kimberley drones on a bit. I record it so I don't have to sit through the endless repetitive breaks. They're all people with their imperfections whether it's Fox CNN CNBC or RT and bias is in the eye of the beholder. Cross Talk on RT is good for another viewpoint. But O'Reilly overstepped the mark it looks judging by the accounts. Sad and stupid.Trump too with the celebrity "locker room" talk. Same ilk and I say that as a conservative. Disappointed and unimpressed.
  3. I'm in NZ and we have both. But you're right RCD's (residual current devices) are only required in wet rooms most likely because earth grounding is compulsory
  4. But you've still got the problem, you've just shielded yourself from it. I've seen "electricians" cut off the earth wires on outlets. When asked, I was told that there was nothing to connect them to because the house was not grounded. When I replied it was regulated practice in my country to do so, I was told most houses in Thailand were not because in Thailand electricity was "different" so there was no need to. With this level of ignorance prevalent, you should check out your system. It's my understanding that if anything buzzes or tingles it's because you are becoming the "earth" for the leak, because there is no other easier route for the leak to take. If you had wet bare feet on the ground the route would be much easier because of less resistance but also you may be dead. You need to do something. Tingling in showers? OMG!
  5. Of course climate change is real, I never said it wasn't . The mission is identifying the reasons for it's changes. As for Armstrong you need to read a bit deeper. He spent some time incarcerated because he wouldn't give up his computer codes on cycles to the powers that be. But I don't really give a monkey's, his predictions on Brexit and a Trump win made me a lot of money so I don't really care what your view of him is.
  6. Perhaps the universe works in cycles and the sun solar cycles. If that's the case as is historically I'm not sure if we impact all that much. I do appreciate clean air to breath but the politicians seem to have another agenda. "The data clearly establishes that there has always been a cycle to CO2 long before man’s industrial age. This is data government wants to hide. As along as they can pretend CO2 has never risen in the past before 1950, then they can tax the air and pretend it’s to prevent climate change. Moreover, while we can clean the air with regulation as we have done, under global warming, they allow “credits” to pollute as long as you pay the government. It is the ultimate scam where they get to tax pollution and people cheer rather than clean up anything."
  7. I agree with your sentiment about drugs but alcohol is a drug too. From another thread Steven100, you stated below............. Think you scored an own goal!
  8. I think this is offensive; smashing up shops and university property, beatings and mob violence ,torching cars and disallowing free speech, is what is also happening and from the left, not from the right.
  9. I wasn't defending Trump and I am not interested in debating whether he is an "oxygen thief" or any other subjectivity. . I am simply trying to decide the merits between the difference residing in 2 methods of interpreting law that seems to conflict and what is allowable under law. Sorry I am not a lawyer as I previously said so my terminology is probably shaky, but there seems to be 2 schools of thought on this issue: One being that law can only be applied within it's own boundaries i.e.according to the letter of set law, or two, rulings on intent that can embrace subjective interpretations of historically related data. My concern is how far outside the letter of the law can rulings travel to allow politically motivated decisions. I would expect that the nomination and confirmation of Gorsuch to the Supreme Court being an originalist would also mean a greater protection of the Constitution which in the end would make it harder for Trump to act outside of the law in any dictatorial sense. I am happy for Waywardwind who I think said he was lawyer also said "The protections of the Constitution will always control when examining any law, regulation, executive order, etc."
  10. Good. But it's the law as you laid out that has to be followed and applied within the 4 corners of the executive order, anything outside of this that Trump or others have said on the campaign trail should be inadmissible I would have thought.The amendment in itself should be enough to carry the day and thus the determination is purely an application of law.
  11. I really hope and pray that nuclear weapons aren't thrown about as a show of strength as has been suggested here. That would make the US the only country in the world to have used nuclear weapons in anger (for the 2nd time). Hard call telling Iran and others that they cannot develop them.
  12. Thanks for this. But does 1152 contradict 212 ? I'm not a Constitutional lawyer ( but don't rub it in!). If the President doesn't have the right "to suspend entry of all or any class of he may deem appropriate" because of a later amendment "no discriminated against....because of of birth or place of residence" then it has to be clear that his executive order is invalid. If the latter cancels the former statute then he is not getting very good advice especially if the former cannot override the latter amendment. How does this work? Any bigger brains than mine here?
  13. Take it easy. Not sure how you arrive at your conclusion when I spoke about the NIMBY effect in Hollywood despite the fact they are busy acting out hypercritical outrage. I agree that the US (and the UK) has largely caused a humanitarian crisis in countries like Yemen by supplying $ billions in arms to SA a sad legacy of the previous administration which I hope will now change but probably will be disappointed. Also I never said I agreed with the travel ban although I will not call it a muslim ban since muslims are admitted into the US every day from Europe and other countries.Extreme vetting is enough. However judges are again ruling politically based on what Trump said as a candidate rather than what is worded in the document. They can't rule by their opinion of intent.
  14. Indeed it is a bit like all the Hollywood celebrities behind their mansion walls and gated communities. Plenty of outrage but will they open their doors?
  15. Extreme vetting should be enough and avoids all these legal wrangles.