The emotional center of gravity of an album that is a one-man confessional. Essentially a son's letter to the father he never had. War took him away and left Roger in a world where his father's death meant less and less. WWII was supposed to insure peace for generations. The promise of eternal peace was a lie.
This is the emotional pinnacle. Sarcasm, rage, ancillary imagery tossed aside. What we're left with is the pure grief and torment that has defined much of his life, so many lives, this particular life: a Royal Air Force tail gunner parachuting to his death after his bomber is hit.
And still another trumpian pedophile...............
Teacher who wore Trump MAGA hat at wedding charged with child sexual abuse
A former substitute teacher who wore a Trump hat at her wedding was indicted on 19 criminal charges in Texas.
Madison Paige Jones, 30, was arrested following an investigation that began into a potential sexual offense involving a child, including her own 5-year-old daughter.
The former Midlothian Independent School District substitute teacher and her boyfriend were charged with numerous crimes. Arrest warrants issued by investigators outlined alleged explicit images and videos shared through Snapchat, and disturbing messages discovered by police revealed the boyfriend's alleged sex fantasies involving a child.
Jones is charged with one count of aggravated assault of a child, two counts of indecency with a child involving sexual contact and one count of possession of child pornography. Jones was detained in the Ellis County Jail with bail set at $90,000.
Authorities said Jones had previously served as a substitute teacher in Texas, but clarified that the alleged offenses did not take place on district property nor involve district students.
District records show that Jones worked four days as a substitute over the past year, including one day at Heritage High School and three days at Baxter Elementary School.
Upon learning of the allegations, the district announced that Jones was no longer employed, reported the Sun.
A representative for Midlothian IDS stated: "Our district process for monitoring employee criminal history functioned as intended, and we were notified quickly by the DPS.
"The substitute teacher is no longer employed by MISD, and the district followed its required reporting procedures with the Texas Education Agency."
Days following Jones' arrest, investigators revealed that a second suspect had been charged.
Zackery Dondlinger, 37, was arrested just two days before Christmas on Dec. 23 in Loving County and charged with sexual performance by a child, according to police.
Dondlinger is currently detained at the Winkler County Detention Center awaiting arraignment. Authorities disclosed that Jones and Dondlinger were romantically involved at the time of the alleged crimes.
Police have yet to release specifics about the allegations. The investigation is still underway, and authorities indicated that more information may be disclosed as the case advances.
I see both arguments for trading Myles and not trading him but personally I would hate to trade our best player and weaken what is a strength of our team the D.
US Treasury plans to put Trump’s signature on new paper currency in first for sitting president
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. Treasury Department plans to put President Donald Trump’s signature on all new U.S. paper currency, the agency announced on Thursday.
The move would be a first for a sitting president, since traditionally, U.S. paper currency carries the signatures of the Treasury Secretary and the Treasurer, not the president.
It’s the latest instance of Trump putting his name and likeness on American cultural institutions, following his renaming of the U.S. Institute of Peace, the Kennedy Center performing arts venue and a new class of battleships, among other tributes.
And the plans come in tandem with an ongoing effort to get Trump’s face on a coin, which has also drawn criticism since federal law prohibits the depiction of a living president on U.S. currency.
Earlier this month, a federal arts commission approved the final design for a 24-karat gold commemorative coin bearing Trump’s image to help celebrate America’s 250th birthday on July 4. The vote by the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts, whose members are supporters of the Republican president and were appointed by him earlier this year, was without objection.
Treasury says the plan to include Trump’s signature on all new paper currency is intended to honor the nation’s 250th birthday, and that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s signature would also appear on the currency.
Bessent said in a statement that “there is no more powerful way to recognize the historic achievements of our great country” than with U.S dollar bills bearing Trump’s name.
Michael Bordo, director of the Center for Monetary and Financial History at Rutgers, said the move will undoubtedly come with political pushback, “but I do not know if he has crossed any legal red lines” since the Treasury Secretary may have the authority to decide who signs the currency.
In 1862, Congress authorized the Treasury Secretary to design and print paper currency, known as “greenbacks,” to finance the Civil War.
The U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing is responsible for producing all paper currency while the U.S. Mint produces all the coins. According to the Federal Reserve, more than $2 trillion in Federal Reserve notes are in circulation.
Democrats criticized the move in part because the announcement comes as Americans face rising costs at the grocery store and the gas pump. The war in Iran , which began Feb. 28, has caused oil and gas prices to soar, deepening people’s affordability concerns.
Rep. Shontel Brown, D-OH, tweeted on X Thursday evening that the Treasury plan is “gross and un-American. But at least it will remind us who to thank when we pay more for gas, goods, and groceries,” she said.
U.S. Treasurer Brandon Beach said in a statement that printing Trump’s signature on the American currency “is not only appropriate, but also well deserved.”
Bordo said, “It also means that many years from now those bills will be collectors’ items.”
If we were to trade Myles, I would NOT want a player in return... especially a player that plays his position. I don't see the point... that Dline is largely built and predicated on having Myles on the one side. Plugging in a less-dominant player thinking the defense overall (much less the front) is only going to make a nominal step back is fooling yourself. I don't like the idea of trading away the cornerstone of your unit and not getting max rebuild value in return.
We are either going to try to bring up the offense as quickly as possible to try to take advantage of the window our defense is in, or we're hitting the reset button.
Trading Myles is hitting the reset button. Hard. I would expect/hope a DWard trade to follow shortly after moving Garrett.
I see both arguments for trading Myles and not trading him but personally I would hate to trade our best player and weaken what is a strength of our team the D.
OK, it seems like some in here are at least open to a trade option. Would this work for anyone?
49ers get Myles Garrett, 2026 5th #148 and 2028 3rd
Browns would get Mykel Williams (2025 first round pick that had his ACL tear last season, not sure when he will be available in 2026, but he would be a future replacement for Myles albeit at a lower level), #27 in 2026, 2027 first and 2029 or 2030 first if the new rule gets amended.
Why it works for the 49ers. They are in Super Bowl mode right now. They are trying to get past the Seahawks and Rams. Garrett could be that player to do that.
Why it works for the Browns. Like it or not, the moves made so far will not take the offense into the top ten realm. Unless Sanders becomes something we haven't seen to day, they will never get to that top ten realm..
Reality, the higher the Browns are in the 2027 draft, the better positioned they are to draft their QB. ONE of the picks needs to be in the top ten to even have a chance. Even though I and everyone in Berea would prefer Sanders be an anomaly and be that starter we all hope for... it is much more likely we need to draft someone in 2027. Myles Garrett actually hurts those chances more than he helps them. Having a Mykel Williams waiting in the wings for the 2027 season would improve the chances of not only getting the QB in 2027, but closing the gap faster once he is in place.
All this while the Browns are proposing the draft capital change when making trades.
It could get interesting if the season does not go as planned at the trade deadline!!! I think with the division being as wide open as it has been in quite some time the Browns feel with an improved Oline and some new weapons the offense can show decent improvement this team can contend in the AFC North. If they don't get assets for 2027 draft may be top priority. That draft is supposed to be loaded at QB, WR, and DE. All premium positions.
All this while the Browns are proposing the draft capital change when making trades. I'm not saying you are trading him in 2026, but it does feel like it leaves options open beyond that, maybe.
I agree. The way I look at it - With Myles, we aren't winning in 2026/27. We probably aren't a contender in 2027/28. I would absolutely look at what potential trade partners would offer. A first this year and next and a second rounder for next year would probably seriously tempt me. 2027 draft class looks very strong. A trade back from #6 to anywhere from 11-20 and an extra 1st next year would give us three 1st round picks in 2027. Obviously you have to then make good selections - but that gives a rebuilding team the surest opportunity/highest odds of turning the team around.
I understand the rationale of not trading your best player away - but the Browns, like it or not, are 100% in rebuild mode. That changes the decision making.
We just need to make sure they are pretty much neutered completely. We have been dorking around with that regime for over 40 years.
Better this that giving them $billions so they can fund their proxies around the globe. LOL, and to think some people around here insisted we were still in control of the money.
Win games now or hope you win big because you made the right decisions down the line.
If they were going to trade him. They should have done it before they signed a new deal.
I don't know. Having a contract in hand gives potential teams an idea of cost.
As for trading Myles, I am inclined to at least listen. We are in a position to draft an edge if you want at #6. Myles would bring at least 3 picks. Maybe not all 3 this year, but that could go a long way to fixing many of our holes.
If you take the emotion out of the thought process, it makes a lot of sense.
So today just after the stock market bell closed trump again extended the deadline with Iran-this time for 10 days till April 6. Just after the Nasdaq moved into correction territory after taking another bath today.
Somebody on CNN referred to one of the financial services companies and their advise to their advisors based on the trump taco chart. Every time it the market is pricing in whatever "strategy" trump is working on at that present time and the market it crapping, they advise their investors that trumo is going to change his mind. Their chart said this afternoon that trump was going to change on Iran and not bomb the energy or power plants.
But I have to wonder, is this just market manipulation, are the talks really progressing or is an attack coming sooner or later?
Also Axios is reporting tonight that a ground invasion seems imminent at some point and we are expanding areas that we could attack with ground forces.
And in that meeting yesterday, alot of people with R after their name were really pissed off at what is coming. Nancy Mace said that we want to send in the troops. They say that this is a red line in the sand-I don't think they have the guts to agree with the dems on some oversight on this or to cut he purse strings.
To me - this is like a symptom of Trump. I don't know if I can explain this very well - but he's conducting himself in the same way with Iran that he has with every other major talking point or policy. He fires from the hip, he contradicts himself, he says one thing then does another .... when it winds up the Democrats and "libtards" on immigration or the border or tariffs or whatever - then the R's love it. Think it's genius. Think that he's scripted it all out to get what he wants ...
With Iran there have been constant contradictions. Go back 9 months or whatever and their Nuclear capability and enriched uranium was completely and utterly obliterated. That's changed now. We've won. That's changed now. Their ability to launch missiles was destroyed. That changed. Regime change with Trump influencing the successor was the goal - that has changed now. No wars - that has changed now (Bigly). Rubio said that it was Israel that forced our hand - that changed quickly (no doubt because it made Trump look weak).
I do think that at the end of the day the market - the economy - Trump and Trump's circle of associates making money is the single most important thing to Trump (other than his image/ego). I think when markets tank - he reacts. IN some cases I think he clearly enables others (and himself) to profit from his reaction. $1/2 Billion bet on oil futures in a QUANTUM spike in trades ... minutes before his last announcement. That might explain some of what we have seen.
But the reality is - driven by ego - he may also think that he has egg on his face after declaring he is negotiating with Iran. I mean that was a contradiction inside the space of 2 paragraphs: There's no-one left to talk to, they are all dead. We are talking to a top guy, the negotiations are going great. . . . and then Iranian sources (everywhere) mocked him and said there is no negotiation and increased their military strikes on Israel and neighbors.
We could see boots on the ground and an escalation. We might see a claim that objectives are complete and he backs out claiming a win. We could see his 15 point negotiation (where points 1-2-3 are all "never have nuclear weapons" !!) put in place - and essentially something similar to the Obama deal that he trashed in his first term put back in place ... we just don't know. I am not sure he knows.
I do think that the wanna-be He-Man Hegseth thinks this is some sort of video game and has zero regard for loss of life or long term consequences and all he wants to do it flex and show the world how mighty the US military is.
I will just say this. A military performs as well as its leaders. Proper planning and execution prevent a lot of terrible things from happening. One example is the bombing of that school. At one point in time it had been a military installation but it hadn't been for years. Nobody bothered to check if it was a proper target at the time it was bombed. Instead they depended on old intel without any updates or current verification.
I will not however isolate this to the trump administration. This is not all that uncommon. The thing I find most odd about the current situation seems to be the consistent moving of the goal posts and the mixed messages. In June trump said that Iran's nuclear program had been obliterated and set back decades if not years. In March, the US intelligence community assessed that Iran was “not building a nuclear weapon.”
Yet it was presented that Iran was an "immanent threat". 2+2 does not equal 6. Unless it's the White House version of new math. There is zero evidence to support that Iran was an immanent threat when he decided to attack.
The first time he struck Iran he said our goal was to eliminate their nuclear threat. This time it is their nuclear capability he claimed he obliterated just months before plus destroying their missile capability which is no threat to the U.S., their drones and a regime change.
Now he claims to be in talks with Iran but it's not the new supreme leader while claiming he has achieved a regime change even though it is still being run by the same group that ran it before and the revolutionary guard.
I can't make sense out of any of it because none of it makes any sense.
But just like other examples of our wars in the middle east he grossly underestimated the resolve of the enemy and there was no clear exit strategy.
I'm glad I stopped by here to read, for a change. I'm not sure I can agree with this post much more than I do.
There are some caveats and "yeah, but maybe" moments, but ^ that's ^ the nutshell version.
What pisses me off, literally, is that there was never any real exit strategy *if* there was no plan to chop off the head. And no plan can be effective without one.
If there isn't already a new regime lying in wait, you're just spoon-feeding a never-ending cycle. Only thing that changes is being "nuke-ready" will take place on an ever-quickening timetable.
We didn't think this whole thing through very well. We convinced ourselves that overwhelming force and the "epic fury" at which we administered it would be enough. The snake is still slithering.
And now Trump is caught with his pants down. His only hope to avoid "forever war" is to root out the snake by installing a new regime. I'm not sure how that's possible without boots on the ground.
I will just say this. A military performs as well as its leaders. Proper planning and execution prevent a lot of terrible things from happening. One example is the bombing of that school. At one point in time it had been a military installation but it hadn't been for years. Nobody bothered to check if it was a proper target at the time it was bombed. Instead they depended on old intel without any updates or current verification.
I will not however isolate this to the trump administration. This is not all that uncommon. The thing I find most odd about the current situation seems to be the consistent moving of the goal posts and the mixed messages. In June trump said that Iran's nuclear program had been obliterated and set back decades if not years. In March, the US intelligence community assessed that Iran was “not building a nuclear weapon.”
Yet it was presented that Iran was an "immanent threat". 2+2 does not equal 6. Unless it's the White House version of new math. There is zero evidence to support that Iran was an immanent threat when he decided to attack.
The first time he struck Iran he said our goal was to eliminate their nuclear threat. This time it is their nuclear capability he claimed he obliterated just months before plus destroying their missile capability which is no threat to the U.S., their drones and a regime change.
Now he claims to be in talks with Iran but it's not the new supreme leader while claiming he has achieved a regime change even though it is still being run by the same group that ran it before and the revolutionary guard.
I can't make sense out of any of it because none of it makes any sense.
But just like other examples of our wars in the middle east he grossly underestimated the resolve of the enemy and there was no clear exit strategy.
I'm glad I stopped by here to read, for a change. I'm not sure I can agree with this post much more than I do.
There are some caveats and "yeah, but maybe" moments, but ^ that's ^ the nutshell version.
What pisses me off, literally, is that there was never any real exit strategy *if* there was no plan to chop off the head. And no plan can be effective without one.
If there isn't already a new regime lying in wait, you're just spoon-feeding a never-ending cycle. Only thing that changes is being "nuke-ready" will take place on an ever-quickening timetable.
We didn't think this whole thing through very well. We convinced ourselves that overwhelming force and the "epic fury" at which we administered it would be enough. The snake is still slithering.
And now Trump is caught with his pants down. His only hope to avoid "forever war" is to root out the snake by installing a new regime. I'm not sure how that's possible without boots on the ground.
