-
Posts
16041 -
Joined
-
Days Won
12
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by bolverk
-
Trump calls for former Guardians and Commanders names.
bolverk replied to boilerhorn's topic in Cloak Room
Are you saying that gingers are the redheaded stepchildren of historically oppressed people in the United States? -
I don't see it either, but he can speak with genuine credibility on topics that connect Christian values with policy. He needs to keep doing what he's doing because he's starting to gain more notice. Short 1-minute clip
-
The genocide in Gaza continues: 32 yesterday; 60+ today. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/20/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-military-evacuation.html Israeli forces killed and wounded dozens of Palestinians on Sunday in the northern Gaza Strip, after crowds gathered near a crossing from Israel to try to seize aid from United Nations trucks entering the enclave, according to the Gaza health ministry and health workers. The episode was the latest in a string of deadly shootings as hunger and desperation have gripped Palestinians in Gaza during Israel’s nearly two-year campaign against Hamas. The latest attack took place near the Zikim crossing between the Gaza Strip and Israel. More than 60 people were killed while seeking aid in northern Gaza on Sunday, according to the health ministry and Mohammad Abu Salmiya, the director of Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City. A field hospital operated by the Palestine Red Crescent Society in northern Gaza was flooded with gunshot victims from the episode near Zikim. The hospital received two of the dead and more than 100 wounded, said Nebal Farsakh, a spokeswoman for the Red Crescent. Israeli soldiers fired “warning shots” after thousands of Gazans gathered in the area, the Israeli military said in a statement. They had opened fire to “remove an immediate threat posed to them,” it added, but did not specify the nature of the threat. The Israeli military also said that the reported number of casualties did “not align” with its initial review, but it did not provide an alternative toll. The military was continuing to examine the episode, it said. The United Nations’ World Food Program said in a statement that a convoy of 25 trucks carrying food for Palestinians was entering northern Gaza when it “encountered massive crowds of hungry civilians which came under gunfire.” The agency said it was “working with authorities to gather more details about the incident.” Chaos has dominated aid distribution in Gaza amid widespread hunger in the territory. Israeli soldiers have repeatedly opened fire near huge crowds of desperate Palestinians heading to sites run by American contractors for the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a private and controversial Israeli-backed group, according to witnesses and the Israeli military. At least 32 people were killed on Saturday after Israeli soldiers began shooting near a Gaza Humanitarian Foundation site in southern Gaza, according to the Gaza health ministry. The episode on Sunday did not occur near one of the foundation’s sites.
-
I bet you're right about the incentive package to relocate the headquarters. In the world of economic development, states take pride in and love to tout the number of corporate headquarters they have, especially those of well-known companies. Business Insider's piece is a little clearer. It looks like they're doing some consolidating on the West Coast as they relocate to Nashville's suburbs. https://www.businessinsider.com/in-n-out-lynsi-snyder-relocation-california-tennessee-business-expansion-2025-7 And how pathetic it is that she's bitching about old Covid restrictions from FOUR YEARS AGO in the present tense? Edit: This is probably like a lot of other relocations out of California, where they leave the vast bulk of their operations in-state but have a small "headquarters" in Tennessee for tax purposes.
-
Wordle 1,492 2/6 ⬛🟩🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Connections Puzzle #770 🟦🟦🟦🟦 🟨🟨🟨🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟪🟪🟪🟪 🙂 Daily Quordle 1273 6️⃣4️⃣ 7️⃣5️⃣ m-w.com/games/quordle/ ⬜⬜🟩⬜🟨 ⬜🟨⬜⬜⬜ 🟨⬜⬜⬜🟩 🟩⬜🟨🟩⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜⬜ 🟨⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟩⬜🟩⬜⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 ⬜🟨🟩🟨⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜🟨 ⬜⬜⬜🟩⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜🟩 ⬜⬜⬜🟩🟩 🟨⬜⬜⬜🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟨🟨⬜⬜🟨 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
-
Wordle 1,491 4/6 🟩⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟨⬛⬛🟩 🟩⬛⬛🟨🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Connections Puzzle #769 🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟨🟨🟨🟨 🟦🟦🟦🟦 🟪🟪🟪🟪 🙂 Daily Quordle 1272 4️⃣8️⃣ 7️⃣5️⃣ m-w.com/games/quordle/ ⬜⬜🟨⬜🟨 ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜🟩 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬜⬜🟩⬜⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬜⬜🟩⬜⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜🟨⬜🟨🟨 🟩⬜⬜⬜🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜🟩 ⬜⬜⬜⬜🟩 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ 🟨⬜🟨⬜⬜ 🟨⬜🟩⬜⬜ ⬜⬜🟨⬜🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩⬜🟩 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
-
That was a very instructive and fucking entertaining story. Thanks for sharing.
-
Those are all interesting questions, and I think you're right to consider them. Also, remember that a lot of those folks on YouTube are basically whores for attention and only making fractions of a penny per view, so for most, it's probably not a super lucrative gig. One thing we do know, for sure, is that the Kremlin paid some influencers. Now, I'm not saying that Russia paid others, but we kind of have to assume that it's not out of the question. Nor is it unthinkable that other countries or organizations (PACs, rich fuckers...dark money in general) might have been doing the same thing, and, in general, we know conservatives have been targeting ALL of social media since the 2016 election, at least (Cambridge Analytica's Facebook stuff). I guess what I'm saying is that the seemingly organic turn toward the dark side by young influencers might not have so organic after all. Or, on the other hand, maybe they all went crazy during Covid. Tough to say.
-
Ghislaine "Sgt. Schultz" Maxwell: "I know NOTH-ING"
bolverk replied to Gil Bang's topic in Cloak Room
The only experience I have with the court system is from my divorce several years ago, so I do appreciate your patient explanations. With that in mind, I think you'd appreciate the context provided by this analysis. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/18/us/politics/trump-epstein-letter-birthday-courts.html For months, President Trump has maligned federal judges who rule against his agenda as politically motivated usurpers, referring to them as “U.S.A.-hating judges” and calling for their impeachment. At times, he has called into question the constitutional role of the courts as a check on the presidency. “He who saves his Country does not violate any Law,” he posted to social media, while his administration claimed expansive powers to unilaterally deport migrants and defund federal programs. But in the case of Jeffrey Epstein, Mr. Trump has taken a different view. In this instance, according to a statement the president posted Thursday night, judges have an important role to play in deciding whether and when grand jury materials related to Mr. Epstein’s indictment for sex trafficking can be released to the public. “I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval,” Mr. Trump said on social media on Thursday. The post came shortly after The Wall Street Journal reported on a 50th birthday greeting it said Mr. Trump sent Mr. Epstein in 2003, including a sexually suggestive drawing, an expression of friendship and a reference to secrets they shared. The New York Times has not verified the report. The idea that a judge should make the final decision about the release of grand jury testimony is normal criminal procedure. “It is illegal to release this material,” Benjamin Wittes, the chief editor of Lawfare and a fellow at the Brookings Institution, wrote in an article arguing against its release. “It’s not a choice the attorney general gets to make.” Evidence presented to the grand jury often includes sensitive information and unproven allegations. The proceedings are kept secret to help gather evidence from witnesses and protect targets of a criminal investigation who might not ultimately be charged. So under any previous presidential administration, Mr. Trump’s assertion that judges should have the final word on the release of grand jury material would be unremarkable. But his White House has repeatedly sought to undermine both the constitutional role and the public prestige of the judiciary. The administration’s most intense rhetoric has been directed at district-court judges — the same ones who oversee grand juries and criminal trials. The administration now appears ready to defer to them on how much Epstein-related grand jury material the public should see. In an emailed statement on Friday, a White House spokeswoman said that comparing Mr. Trump’s stance on Epstein grand jury material with his “well-warranted criticisms of out-of-control district-court judges” was a “false equivalence.” “The New York Times is comparing apples to oranges to fuel their narrative of the day,” wrote Abigail Jackson, the spokeswoman. One legal scholar said it was reasonable to take a holistic view of Mr. Trump’s approach to the courts. The president’s statement on Thursday about grand jury testimony amounted to “flip-flopping on the role of judges” when compared to his pattern of hostility toward the courts and judicial review, said Judith Resnik, a law professor at Yale. “If you believe in the rule of law, you ought to believe that judges have an important role to play in articulating the parameters of lawful actions — not sometimes, but always,” she said. In other matters, the administration has made clear its view that individual district-court judges wield too much power. According to statements by Mr. Trump and his administration, the judges who have ruled against their agenda include a “far-left activist” and a “radical left lunatic.” Mr. Trump is not the first president to criticize unfavorable rulings, but the severity and tone of his statements about individual judges, as well as his calls for judges to be impeached, have prompted some to urge him to tamp down his language in the face of rising threats to judges. And a Justice Department whistle-blower has charged that in private, the administration’s disdain for the judiciary goes even further, claiming that he heard one senior official say the government would need to consider ignoring its obligation to follow court orders. That official, Emil Bove III, was later nominated by Mr. Trump to an appellate judgeship. Mr. Bove told lawmakers that he had never advised colleagues to violate a court order; other Justice Department officials denied the allegations. -
explosion at L.A. Sheriff's facility. At least 3 cops dead
bolverk replied to Gil Bang's topic in Daily Texan
Yeah, I don't know the first thing about any of that stuff. I just brought up the only recent example I know of. -
We also have a thread in the CR that was started in 2019, which has grown to 89 pages, where folks on the very first page talk about not giving a shit whose "team" gets caught up in the Epstein scandal so long as guilty parties are punished. Your personal lack of give-a-shit there, too, is also noted. Your aggressively defensive indignation, including personal insults such as the one quoted above, didn't get going until one of those "teams" actually began actively blocking the public release of information. And then, you suddenly decide to come out and start attacking the "team" that wants the files to see daylight. I hope you can see how your claim to be on the "team" of justice and transparency rings oh-so-fucking-hollow.
- 1009 replies
-
- 16
-
-
-
-
explosion at L.A. Sheriff's facility. At least 3 cops dead
bolverk replied to Gil Bang's topic in Daily Texan
I can't speak to LASD protocols, but at least in Austin, that's what they did this past spring. -
For the record, we have a 24-page thread about shaming pedophiles, yet I don't recall you ever posting in that one. Hell, this thread is 3 years old, and your first post here wasn't until Sunday. So, based on your lack of posting history about the topic, it seems that you didn't start giving a shit until very recently, for whatever reason.
-
Are you claiming that your bad parking and these guys stopped the Roman Empire? That's bad ass.
-
That one was on my mind. It's a charming little station, and *I think* the only one you can get when you're in town.
-
explosion at L.A. Sheriff's facility. At least 3 cops dead
bolverk replied to Gil Bang's topic in Daily Texan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_LASD_deputy_gangs -
It's a Sisyphean struggle, BV. Much like mine, with trying to get people to copy/paste plain text around these parts.
-
If anybody still gives a shit about the Palestinians, or the future of Israel for that matter, take 15 minutes to read this. I'm putting up a gift link, so it can be read in full and you can follow any of the links in this essay. Personally, I've been hesitant to use the word 'genocide' in preference of 'ethnic cleansing' to describe what's going on in Gaza. Still, this guy who studies this shit makes a compelling case and lays out a good global argument for why we shouldn't shy away from using the proper nomenclature. @statsman, who would be wise to read it, thinks he's supporting Israel in denying what's happening. On the contrary, his pigheadedness, as well as that of many others, only imperils the nation in the long term. By Omer Bartov Dr. Bartov is a professor of Holocaust and genocide studies at Brown University. A month after the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, I believed there was evidence that the Israeli military had committed war crimes and potentially crimes against humanity in its counterattack on Gaza. But contrary to the cries of Israel’s fiercest critics, the evidence did not seem to me to rise to the crime of genocide. By May 2024, the Israel Defense Forces had ordered about one million Palestinians sheltering in Rafah — the southernmost and last remaining relatively undamaged city of the Gaza Strip — to move to the beach area of the Mawasi, where there was little to no shelter. The army then proceeded to destroy much of Rafah, a feat mostly accomplished by August. At that point it appeared no longer possible to deny that the pattern of I.D.F. operations was consistent with the statements denoting genocidal intent made by Israeli leaders in the days after the Hamas attack. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had promised that the enemy would pay a “huge price” for the attack and that the I.D.F. would turn parts of Gaza, where Hamas was operating, “into rubble,” and he called on “the residents of Gaza” to “leave now because we will operate forcefully everywhere.” Mr. Netanyahu had urged his citizens to remember “what Amalek did to you,” a quote many interpreted as a reference to the demand in a biblical passage calling for the Israelites to “kill alike men and women, infants and sucklings” of their ancient enemy. Government and military officials said they were fighting “human animals” and, later, called for “total annihilation.” Nissim Vaturi, the deputy speaker of Parliament, said on X that Israel’s task must be “erasing the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth.” Israel’s actions could be understood only as the implementation of the expressed intent to make the Gaza Strip uninhabitable for its Palestinian population. I believe the goal was — and remains today — to force the population to leave the Strip altogether or, considering that it has nowhere to go, to debilitate the enclave through bombings and severe deprivation of food, clean water, sanitation and medical aid to such an extent that it is impossible for Palestinians in Gaza to maintain or reconstitute their existence as a group. My inescapable conclusion has become that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people. Having grown up in a Zionist home, lived the first half of my life in Israel, served in the I.D.F. as a soldier and officer and spent most of my career researching and writing on war crimes and the Holocaust, this was a painful conclusion to reach, and one that I resisted as long as I could. But I have been teaching classes on genocide for a quarter of a century. I can recognize one when I see one. This is not just my conclusion. A growing number of experts in genocide studies and international law have concluded that Israel’s actions in Gaza can only be defined as genocide. So has Francesca Albanese, the U.N. special rapporteur for the West Bank and Gaza, and Amnesty International. South Africa has brought a genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice. The continued denial of this designation by states, international organizations and legal and scholarly experts will cause unmitigated damage not just to the people of Gaza and Israel but also to the system of international law established in the wake of the horrors of the Holocaust, designed to prevent such atrocities from happening ever again. It is a threat to the very foundations of the moral order on which we all depend. Continued: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/15/opinion/israel-gaza-holocaust-genocide-palestinians.html?unlocked_article_code=1.XU8.udoX.V-TuaxjE1gWW&smid=url-share
-
Great example. It's this kind of shit that makes me think to myself, "Fuck'em." If either one of them is having an affair with someone outside of the workplace and it doesn't affect their judgment at work, I don't give a shit. But again, this is the CEO and the head of HR. As an employee or some B2B vendor/customer of that company, I'm exploring options for exiting that relationship if either of them sticks around.
-
This is where I'm at on the scandale du jour. It's not just the guy having an affair, or even having an affair with some employee. She's the head of HR, and I'm always wary of those fuckers. Sure, HR is always in bed with leadership, but she's literally in bed with leadership. Fuck going to work for that company with that CEO and that HR lady.
-
It's bizarre that certain people view physics and chemistry as "political." Sure, you might not agree with how public policy responds to basic scientific facts, and that's when things can get political, but you can't credibly deny that the climate is changing at this point.
-
I live on the edge of the desert along a ridgeline about 35-40 feet above the nearest creek. This house ain't never gonna flood. Tornadoes/hail/wildfires are my personal concern.
-
Question: Is FEMA going away with all these cuts? If so, who's going to be updating and redrawing maps?
-
You're probably right, but federal funding varies quite a bit from station to station. The table below is from the same article I posted above. In Texas, NPR gets about 8% of its funding from the feds, and PBS gets about 20%. Many of the more rural/isolated states seem highly dependent on that funding. Of course, those areas also tend to be more Republican, so they may not miss having public TV/radio. At the same time, they likely don't have great access to commercial offerings either, which was kind of the point of having funding for public access. Still, you're correct about internet access -- though many rural/isolated areas have challenges there, too.
-
Ghislaine "Sgt. Schultz" Maxwell: "I know NOTH-ING"
bolverk replied to Gil Bang's topic in Cloak Room
Maybe. It was written more than 20 years ago, and we've already noted how much his speaking abilities have declined over the last 10 years. So maybe 20 years ago, he was a better wordsmith (certainly never eloquent), but I wouldn't know. He wasn't on my political/cultural radar until after he started with his racist birther conspiracy bullshit.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... COOKIE MONSTER!