… according to the 9/11 Commission Report, at page 38
September 11, 2001

“At 9:59, an Air Force lieutenant colonel working in the White House Military Office joined the conference and stated he had just talked to Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley. The White House requested (1) the implementation of continuity of government measures, (2) fighter escorts for Air Force One, and (3) a fighter combat air patrol over Washington, D.C.”

Shortly thereafter, the recently installed non-President declared a State of Emergency. Since that declaration, over 50 NSC directives have been issued, the vast majority without publicly known title or description. That State of Emergency has been extended, annually, to the present day.

So, here are my questions. If we are still in a state of emergency (we are), and if the COG plans and statutes are still in force (we haven’t been told otherwise), isn’t this a de facto state of martial law? If you can’t ascertain that you are not living in a condition of martial law, how can you assert that you are not? If you are, then opinions of any kind or strength don’t count, unless you are the non-President.

This leads to the following rumination: If I’m a leader and I’m not completely dumb (I know, I know, but , can you say who the ‘leader’ really is?), I would want to rule with as little fuss as possible. Fuss, that is, that might otherwise have blowback. Fuss that would raise troublesome objections. You know, fuss. So why tell anyone more than they absolutely need to know? Why not pretend that, in some instances, we are back to ‘normal’ life, and then I can sleep soundly with the knowledge that all of the rules, laws, procedures and the constitution have been completely put into suspended animation? Then, I could allow people to argue endlessly over fine points (or not so fine points) of law, the constitution, etc., while doing whatever I damn wanted to, people (my people) could write faux justifications for various courses of action without reference to reality, other people (my people) can loot the country freely, and legal and financial experts can trip all over themselves trying to untangle my actions and intents, because ultimately I am protected by the ongoing declaration of a State of Emergency and the (essentially) unlimited power granted by the COG statutes. Sound familiar?

Isn’t that how it really is these days? Can anyone set me straight here?
Please don’t bother with the butterfly dreaming it’s a human argument. I am unfortunately not dreaming.

–TA (The law is NOT the law)

And did you note the Yoo doozy the other day where he flipped the meaning of “And”?

Funny, I coulda sworn that that camp were the ones screaming the loudest when teh Clenis observed (correctly, in the context) “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

What if, in programming, you had no “OR” functions? =

Apologies, this keeps removing the carrots that were intended to signal ‘more than/ less than; more than or = to, less than or = to’).

And that whole concussion thing…. from what I hear, the evidence is growing. It’s not good. However, given your other work, I’d say you’re on the safer side of the issue — But I am NOT a medical authority 8^0

The programmers around these here parts will fully understand it in these terms:

What if, in programming, you had no “OR” functions? =
What if you had no “IF, AND ONLY IF” (for… if…)?
What if you had no EQUALS? (=)
What if you had no NOT EQUAL TO? (!=)

Anyway, you get the idea.
If you didn’t have those things, you’d have NO “LOGIC” in the code.
Zippola.

How would the software ever be able to assess criteria and then locate the decision points and act correctly?

(And I defer to the hardcore coders around here, off the top of my head, I’m guessing: bobschacht, randiego, JohnLopresti, BillE, JohnJ, MadDogs, WmO, …. just for starters.)

Think of conjunctions as the ‘flow chart diamonds’ of linguistic expression.
They’re the decision points.
Without them…..

Well….. look at GWBush the past 8 years; fuzzy decision criteria, not well identified…

Must dash off — writing this rushed, so hope it makes sense.
Explain to your editor the significance of conjunctions.
Don’t overuse.

But they’re essential.
(Cognitive explanations reserved for some other time…)

It’s a cognitive problem with enormous institutional ramifications.
If you want an example of complete and absolute ’system collapse’, here it is.
Seriously scary.

From your keystrokes to my reading…”scary” is an understatement within the context you present.

By the way, you made my day…My editor slams me for using conjunctions.

It’s finals week for son-of-klynn. Therefore, I was late to the document party. Thank you EW and all contributing to the weed garden.

Does that mean I won’t get Alzheimers? Because I just read something the other day that said those who have sports concussions in their youth are more prone to Alzheimers. And I had at least one of those after taking on Dartmouth’s rugby team single-handed.

And did you note the Yoo doozy the other day where he flipped the meaning of “And”?