This user has been banned.
damn, you saw it before the edit.
i’m fully aware it’s unhealthy, i’ve got no clue what to do about it so… ¯\ _(ツ)_/¯
I am but a simple man and I do not want you to die.
Saying warbler is an instigator isn’t a valid point, and the only reason people don’t like you is because of this shit.
But to be fair you only victimized yourself twice in that post. Just stop being so uptight. Somebody says something that you don’t like or annoys you? Here’s a brilliant idea, just throw it back at them or make a joke of your own instead of “why am I not allowed to blah blah blah”. You’ve made yourself into a victim and a butt of jokes. Growing some thicker skin and throwing some jokes back would go alot farther to remedying the situation than complaining about how unfair it is.
Nobody hates you.
You are the one that got uptight about my original post. Did you see anybody else but you deny it? Ahhhhhh, no.
😉
And then there’s this …
Let’s laugh and move on, shall we.
😃
Warbler’s instigation is never intentional. That much is obvious. You are an instigator as well, but I don’t think you do it deliberately either. Maybe this common problem could give you a little more patience for others like Warbler.
I have not engaged warbler at all recently and he has been well behaved himself though not always so innocent. My behavior has been calm and fairly conversational. But, as soon as I try to make a valid point, we’re back to “oh you just wanna be the victim”. It gets old and fucking sickening. I wasn’t nasty when I made the comparison and I didn’t put any names in the post. Am I denied from making what I feel are valid points because some members don’t like me? It never fails that at least every few days, at least one person brings it up, or says something else to fuel the fire.
It’s like some don’t like me when I behave because then they can’t talk shit about it.
😦
I’m not saying this is right for everyone. I’m not saying we should not offer such “cures” them. But to expect it as the better option for all of them is a bit presumptuous. I don’t think I would ever want my brother cured. I love him as he is, and I’m so grateful for all he has taught me and my family. I can see why a cure to autism might be equally repulsive to many.
I don’t think anyone here said, I know I didn’t, that a cure would be the best option. Not even the article that was quoted with the hyperbole attached to it said that. I do believe that when medical treatments make leaps and bounds and become able to allow a choice, it should be up to the patient, and no-one else. Everything I do for my daughter, is done with her input, and I do not benefit from it in any way. I raise her to be her own person. It would be more presumptuous to not put their best interests in front of our own. I’m not nor did I say people can’t be afraid of it or hate it, that is still a choice, but we should want what our kids feel make them happy, not what we feel would make us happy.
[said:]
Rice has not commented on the report. It would likely be legal for Rice to request the unmasking—“The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything,” Lake notes.
As Lake notes, nothing he—or anyone else—has uncovered lends credence to President Trump’s outlandish and unsupported claim that Obama ordered surveillance of him at Trump Tower prior to the election. Nor does the new story suggest any illegal behavior on Rice’s part. As with each step in the story, this one offers only a small sliver of information. Many experts seem to think the Bloomberg View story does not imply anything improper or unusual. Others withheld judgment, saying there’s simply not enough information to judge.
“In a situation where there’s incidental collection and it appears that they’re discussing U.S. incoming or current officials, it would not be unusual for a national security adviser to try to understand what it is this foreign government is trying to do to manipulate their position against the U.S.,” said Nada Bakos, a former CIA analyst and national-security commentator. “That’s how the game is played.”
Key words are “incidental surveillance”. That means no direct surveillance hence no reason for their names to be unmasked. She would of course have the legal right to do it but it would be the same as them catching a part of a ordinary persons conversation with Bernie Sanders and then she asks them to unmask both of those names even though they had nothing to do with what they were looking for, hence the term incidental, which is what the conversation would have been.
LOL
Yes, if I’m understanding this he’s trying to turn this conversation into one about hypocrites and how he’s bullied.
Shocking allegations, I know, but bear with me here!
No need to stoke the fire possessed. Duracell was correct. It has nothing to do with me. Id still talks crap to me and you don’t see me getting nasty to him do you? Ok then.
Thanks for the vote of confidence though.
😃
Warb is a true instigator but I don’t think he has it in him to be the bullying type.
Another poignant “it’s acceptable to treat these people badly but not those of us that do it” conversation.
I’m sorry, I’m feeling like Mrs. Howell today.
😉
If you think Darth Id is not a bully and Warbler is, then you are truly clueless.
LOL
😉
I cannot tell you who I think is or is not a bully because the posse would come get me.
😉
My niece has Asperger’s and she’s going through treatment.
Against my better judgement, I have to ask what you’re talking about. There’s no treatment for Asperger’s. You can get treatment for some of the symptoms, but that’s not what we are talking about.
There are regimens/treatments designed for all types of medical conditions. There is no cure for Asperger’s but there are treatments/regimens that can help alleviate some of the complexities that might and often do exacerbate the behaviors associated with the condition. Thus, the regimen/treatment, allows the condition itself to manifest minimally. Of course, it would certainly be more difficult with severe cases, but there are still possibilities. They are all directed at a better quality of life and living for the patient themselves.
Which has zero to do with what we’re talking about, especially in relation to my “Fuck off Trump” comment which you were clearly trying to use against me, but ok.
Back on ignore you go.
You asked me about my niece, not about your daughter and your petty beef with Trump so piss off.
And good for me, you ignoring me is good for everyone.
My niece has Asperger’s and she’s going through treatment.
Against my better judgement, I have to ask what you’re talking about. There’s no treatment for Asperger’s. You can get treatment for some of the symptoms, but that’s not what we are talking about.
There are regimens/treatments designed for all types of medical conditions. There is no cure for Asperger’s but there are treatments/regimens that can help alleviate some of the complexities that might and often do exacerbate the behaviors associated with the condition. Thus, the regimen/treatment, allows the condition itself to manifest minimally. Of course, it would certainly be more difficult with severe cases, but there are still possibilities. They are all directed at a better quality of life and living for the patient themselves.
Why would someone in the Obama administration or any other request the redaction of names caught in “incidental” surveillance? Weird?
White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
The pattern of Rice’s requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like “U.S. Person One.”
The National Security Council’s senior director for intelligence, Ezra Cohen-Watnick, was conducting the review, according to two U.S. officials who spoke with Bloomberg View on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. In February Cohen-Watnick discovered Rice’s multiple requests to unmask U.S. persons in intelligence reports that related to Trump transition activities. He brought this to the attention of the White House General Counsel’s office, who reviewed more of Rice’s requests and instructed him to end his own research into the unmasking policy.
The intelligence reports were summaries of monitored conversations – primarily between foreign officials discussing the Trump transition, but also in some cases direct contact between members of the Trump team and monitored foreign officials. One U.S. official familiar with the reports said they contained valuable political information on the Trump transition such as whom the Trump team was meeting, the views of Trump associates on foreign policy matters and plans for the incoming administration.
Rice did not respond to an email seeking comment on Monday morning. Her role in requesting the identities of Trump transition officials adds an important element to the dueling investigations surrounding the Trump White House since the president’s inauguration.
Both the House and Senate intelligence committees are probing any ties between Trump associates and a Russian influence operation against Hillary Clinton during the election. The chairman of the House intelligence committee, Representative Devin Nunes, is also investigating how the Obama White House kept tabs on the Trump transition after the election through unmasking the names of Trump associates incidentally collected in government eavesdropping of foreign officials.
Rice herself has not spoken directly on the issue of unmasking. Last month when she was asked on the “PBS NewsHour” about reports that Trump transition officials, including Trump himself, were swept up in incidental intelligence collection, Rice said: “I know nothing about this,” adding, “I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that account today.”
Rice’s requests to unmask the names of Trump transition officials do not vindicate Trump’s own tweets from March 4 in which he accused Obama of illegally tapping Trump Tower. There remains no evidence to support that claim.
But Rice’s multiple requests to learn the identities of Trump officials discussed in intelligence reports during the transition period does highlight a longstanding concern for civil liberties advocates about U.S. surveillance programs. The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything. This suggests Rice’s unmasking requests were likely within the law.
The news about Rice also sheds light on the strange behavior of Nunes in the last two weeks. It emerged last week that he traveled to the White House last month, the night before he made an explosive allegation about Trump transition officials caught up in incidental surveillance. At the time he said he needed to go to the White House because the reports were only on a database for the executive branch. It now appears that he needed to view computer systems within the National Security Council that would include the logs of Rice’s requests to unmask U.S. persons.
The ranking Democrat on the committee Nunes chairs, Representative Adam Schiff, viewed these reports on Friday. In comments to the press over the weekend he declined to discuss the contents of these reports, but also said it was highly unusual for the reports to be shown only to Nunes and not himself and other members of the committee.
Indeed, much about this is highly unusual: if not how the surveillance was collected, then certainly how and why it was disseminated.
Mrs. Thurston Howell, if you please.
😉
^I was responding to your post, not warblers.
Another poignant “it’s acceptable to treat these people badly but not those of us that do it” conversation.
I’m sorry, I’m feeling like Mrs. Howell today.
😉
Great post. If someone gave me a magic wand and said I could “cure” my daughter today, I wouldn’t do it, because she’d no longer be the girl I love, she’d be someone different.
I see multiple problems with that approach. One is, should you have the right decide she shouldn’t have “the cure” if one existed? What if she would want to be cured? Another is, why wouldn’t she be the girl you love? I mean, you don’t love her just because she has autism right? If she had never had autism, you still would have loved her, right? Also how would she be someone different? She would just be your daughter without autism. Your daughter is defined by more than just autism. She a person and would still be that same person if her autism were cured. If your daughter had cancer and that got cured, would she be someone different after she was cured? Myself, if I had kid with autism and there was a cure, I’d want him/her to have it(but I will not be so arrogant to deny the possibility that my opinion would be altered if I actually had a child with autism). Why would I want to deny him/her the opportunity live free of autism, to be free of all of its problems?
Call me stupid, clueless, bigoted or whatever, but I don’t get it.
edit: I really hope I haven’t offended by any of what I said in this post, because that wasn’t my intent. Keep in mind that I have no family members with autism. I don’t know anyone that does. So if I have offended, it is because of my own ignorance of the issues.
I’m not offended, they are fair questions.
Cancer does not fundamentally change your brain the way autism does. My daughter has challenges that neurotypicals do not,
neurotypicals? You mean people without autism?
Yes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurotypical
Another way to look at is this - if I could go back and have my first daughter not be stillborn, would I? I don’t know, because it would change the course of our history. Our second child might have been a boy instead of a girl. We might have only had one child, and almost certainly wouldn’t have had three…so our younger daughter would basically cease to exist. “Curing” my daughter’s autism would essentially erase her from this world, replaced by a different girl.
Here we are talking about the problems of altering history as opposed to the issues of curing something. I’d love to go back in time and break my father’s fall so he’d still be with us, but I don’t think I should be allowed to mess with history like that.
My point is that simply “curing” an autistic person would not just be a simple do-it-and-it’s-over thing (assuming a cure existed) and that it has ripple effects, and rather large ones at that. Choosing to go back and have my first daughter survive would change everything that came after it, and so would “curing” my autistic daughter.
Lastly, the argument that she should be the one to have the choice is a compelling one, however I don’t think she is old enough to make that choice (if the choice were available to us). If we were given a magic wand and were told we could choose to wave it any time in the next ten years, I might feel differently ten years down the road.
But here is the problem. If I am understanding autism at all, in order to truly cure iy, it would have to be done sometime early in brain development, way before she was 18 and could decide for herself. This brings up yet another issue. Are people with autism capable of making their own decisions? We are talking about a problem with the mind here. What if “curing” your daughter were the only way to bring her to a state of mind where she could make her own decisions?
My daughter has Asperger’s and is high functioning. She can make decisions already, but at her age I wouldn’t want her making lots of unimportant non-Asperger’s related decisions just because of her age (like if she should watch 14 hours of tv today). My statement was more in relation to the fact that she’s too young to be making certain decisions, independent of her neuro condition.
understood, but as I said before, if I understand things correctly. The only time would be possible to truly “cure” autism is at a time before brain development. This would be way before she could make her own decisions you would have to decide one way or the other. Also this would be before you even knew of any ripple effects.
Consider a story: a man was in a car with his sister. A horrible car accident occurs. The sister is killed. The man is seriously injured. He is brought to a hospital. While there, he meets a nurse and falls in love with her and they eventually marry and have kids. One of this kids grows up and finds the cure for cancer. Now it can argued that that accident had ripples and without the ripples with children would not have been born and cancer would not have been cured. Still, you would not tell someone driving with their not try to avoid a car accident if they could, would you?
We aren’t talking about this, at least I’m not. I’m talking about waving a magic wand and “curing” my daughter’s autism. So I would know the person she used to be and the person she became, and I would fear the consequences.
I guess it is more complicated than I originally realized. Still, what if I were to go back in time to a point before your daughter’s brain developed. What if I were to tell the Frink of that time that his daughter had autism and gave him a magic wand to cure it. What would he say?
I’m not even a parent and I know that that is a ridiculous hypothetical question to ask a parent to answer. It’s like I said earlier, maybe someday they’ll figure out enough about the causes to determine how to prevent it from happening, but “curing” autism isn’t even a possibility.
Maybe what they really want to cure, by finding solid solutions, is the stigma surrounding it.
We can “what if” and “possibly” til the cows come home and go back out. “It is” and “it isn’t” are what we have and it all comes down to personal choice. My niece has Asperger’s and she’s going through treatment. It has not changed who she is and always was. She still see’s the world the same way and through the same thoughts. I wouldn’t say “fuck you” to her mother, my sister, for wanting to help her daughter as best she can with all the options available. Why? Because it was never about me, it was about my niece, and if she’s happy I’m happy. I would be the same way if it was my own daughter.
Donna Brazile, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Hillary Clinton … against rules provided town-hall questions to candidate before appearance, cheated fellow candidate out of running for President, transmitted classified email over an unsecured private email server, used multiple devices to conduct classified state business.
The L.A. Times article posted above forgets why we’re at this point in time in the first place.
^We’d probably have to file a FOIA request for that. 😉
I think the article Frink linked to is really not a good example of the autism support community. Science has come quite a long way since the 50’s and they are finding that though not every person will see an automatic reversal of their symptoms, if the processes of the body are so out of whack, that realigning them with new therapies and discoveries has done wonders that weren’t previously seen.
I am also aware that gene study has revealed an awful lot of info to help create new treatments and support. I don’t think they mean “cure” as in like getting a shot for clap and you’re good. I have a niece that suffers from Asperger’s which is on the autimsm spectrum and she has gone through quite a ride but she is fairing far better than she used to in big part to these new realizations science has had in regards to treatment.
And, just to get this out of the way now, Fuck You Jetrell.
My laundry is dirty. Damn lazy wash machine.
😦
Hey possessed, here’s your proof.
😉
Damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Fuck everybody.
😉
Okay, I give up.
Why yes there was.
😉
At least you’re taking it in stride this time, lol.
Anyone that says I’m not trying can, well, you know …
😃
It’s what happens when I don’t pay better attention to threads I create for a positive vibe. And I’ve only got a drum stick sized stick up my ass.
😉
Yeah, literally none of that was posted while you were away.
Jedit: you altered your wording while I was posting that.
Yeah, I noticed some dates, but it’s still fucked up though.
Extreme - Am I Ever Gonna Change?
I’m tired of being me,
And I don’t like what I see,
I’m not who I appear to be
So I start off every day,
Down on my knees I will pray,
For a change in any way
But as the day goes by,
I live through another lie,
If it’s any wonder why
Am I ever gonna change
Will I always stay the same
If I say one thing,
Then I do the other
It’s the same old song,
That goes on forever
Am I ever gonna change
I’m the only one to blame
When I think I’m right,
I wind up wrong
It’s a futile fight,
Gone on too long
Please tell me if it’s true,
Am I too old to start anew,
'Cause that’s what I want to do
But time and time again,
When I think I can,
I fall short in the end
So why do I even try,
Will it matter when I die,
Can anyone hear my cry?
Am I ever gonna change
Take it day by day
My will is weak
And my flesh too strong
This peace I seek
Till thy kingdom comes
Written by Gary F. Cherone, Nuno Bettencourt • Copyright © Universal Music Publishing Group