noisefree

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

It depends on where you draw the line for "attempt" - the Secret Service isn't an exactly candid organization (to put it lightly) and the media/public doesn't spend much time focusing on the foiled plots they do learn about (insert your opinion as to the "why?" here). My own assumption is that the threat vectors against those that are granted Secret Service protection are probably numerous and coming from many different directions.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

C'mon dude, just post your demoralizing articles and give it a rest - there is no need to further betray your intent with additional words.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

I agree that polling has been off the last several cycles because it skews older and with that in mind I am asking out of sincere interest - what leads you to expect record turnout in the under-30 demographic?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

The Electoral College and most states arbitrarily deciding to award EC votes as a "winner takes all" proposition is fucking us.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

That would certainly make his unlikely career trajectory (constant lateral moves upwards once sussed out as a fraud or just plain bad employee) make even more sense than the typical "rich dad ergo fail upward" explanation.

Now do Alan Dershowitz!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

You have to tell them that you love them, everytime, or it's not even close to a proper bye. That's how you get an in with the HR folks really quickly so you know that they have your back. Work on easy mode, more or less. Like and subscribe for more social lifehacks.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Very cool, I'll check that out. Thanks!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Intention doesn't always carry over well via text, but going from "shocking" and "I guess..." to "Do you not understand...?" comes across as a bit condescending/aggressive. Perhaps you thought I was being hostile? Or, perhaps I'm misreading the intent.

At any rate, keeping in mind the things that don't carry across over text, I wasn't disagreeing with you and was merely speculating in a parallel fashion about those that don't return and/or are deemed unacceptable defection by the leadership in Pyongyang. I haven't picked over my initial comment but it's possible that I put a period somewhere a question mark was supposed to go or something. Regardless, I apologize if I came across as trying to argue against what you were saying, it was not my intention. I don't tend to process things in a strictly linear progression and that translates to words that come out sometimes a bit disordered seeming or perhaps seemingly lacking in explicit context where it might be needed to ensure clarity in what I'm saying.

To answer the question rather than treat it as rhetorical: It’s quite possible that I don't know how North Korean defection usually works because I'm not North Korean nor a policy analyst/SME specializing in North Korea. I read the article and your comment and found myself speculating, given the situation and deepening ties with Russia (who are objectively experts at tracking down dissidents abroad) about what policy and procedures might be in place now the event of would-be permanent defectors that end up becoming anti-Pyongyang mouthpieces or are high rank enough to leak meaningful intel to an adversary (I doubt they are sending any such people to Ukraine). But, I'm not an expert, I'm just a person speculating and commenting because I enjoy doing so and seeing what others have to say (including you). Thanks for sharing the article, have a good one.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Or maybe they have an agreement to receive intel from Russia on the whereabouts of any problematic defectors/assistance dealing with them. I imagine the threat to loved ones back home is a huge deterrent for most would be defectors, though some are obviously desperate enough to overcome that and defect anyway.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Hey now, stay on narrative - shhhh! /s

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

I wish it was more widely known by the average person that coal ash is radioactive and contains heavy metals like lead and arsenic due to concentration of elements that were found in trace amounts in the coal and remain once the coal is burnt. It's horrible how poorly coal ash was handled (or purposefully used in construction) in the past and how contamination events still happen with little meaningful consequence to energy companies.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago

Oh yes, Senators Markey and Sanders, well known servants of Big Oil. /s

view more: ‹ prev next ›