They didn't have enough boots on the ground because he refused to ask for help. Why is reality so hard for you to understand?
Twitter Attacks Lawyer Representing American Patriot, Kyle Rittenhouse
- Thread starter Biff_Poindexter
- Start date
They didn't have enough boots on the ground because he refused to ask for help. Why is reality so hard for you to understand?
Lysistrata
Platinum Member
- Oct 11, 2017
- 17,484
- 6,544
- 360
The two people dead in Kenosha. Plus the guy who got his arm shot off. Don't be an idiot.
I'm tired of useless people using the word "patriot" to hide the fact that they are not patriotic at all.
Bob Blaylock
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #323
Subhuman rioting looting criminal pieces of shit do not count as “people”.
Neither do those who take their side against that of actual human beings.
Lysistrata
Platinum Member
- Oct 11, 2017
- 17,484
- 6,544
- 360
No, the only asshole here is YOU. Denying reality and denigrating a young man who defended himself from a pedo and a domestic abuser among others who have stated they wanted to kill him. He did what your Dim mayors and governors WON’T do. Protect property and businesses from rioters.
You really are an asshole.
You linked to a wikipedia article, which interestingly was updated after this shooting.
I posted a link to the actual laws.
Your article cited two sections in support.
29.304 Restrictions on hunting and use of firearms by persons under 16 years of age.
Here is the actual law: Wisconsin Legislature: 29.304
This appears to relate to HUNTING and firearms.
941.28 Possession of short-barreled shotgun or short-barreled rifle
Here is the link.
Wisconsin Legislature: 941.28
docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
This doesnt seem particularly relevant.
Here is the link for possession of fire arms by minors.
3a,b, and c state who this section does not apply to. None of those would seem to apply to Kyle.Wisconsin Legislature: 948.55
docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
Rittenhouse WAS charged with possession of a dangerous weapon while under 18.
I am not a lawyer. I doubt you are either.
What a crock of shit. Your "young man" did not protect himself from a "pedo and a domestic abuser among others who have stated they wanted to kill him." He did not know the people whom he shot, whatever their backgrounds, so this is bullshit and I'm calling it. He was an under-age, out-of-state boy who was not supposed to be there in the first place and was violating the curfew. He is on camera before he committed his crimes, but the police did absolutely nothing. He shot killed one person and gravely injured another who were chasing him down after his first murder: two people who tried to stop him. Don't try to make him into some hero.
I have asked over and over how Rittenhouse knew the people he shot and have gotten no answer. If the Kenosha police had done their jobs, he would not even been there. He did not even live in Kenosha, and did not even live in Wisconsin. What does the political party of a mayor or a governor have to do with any of this??? Did the mayor of Kenosha or the governor of Wisconsin issue a "stand down" order pursuant to which the Kenosha police did not enforce the law when they encountered him?
Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 89,053
- 67,018
- 3,565
just as there were legit protesters supporting Confederate monuments in Charlotte when one lib protester died and liberals attacked everyone on the other side of the street as nazis
Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 89,053
- 67,018
- 3,565
You keep asking that same dumb question that on one can answer
the liberal democrat mayor in kenosha has failed to protect his city from the BLM and ANTIFA vermin by establishing law and order in his city
just as the liberal democrat elected officials in portland and other cities have failed to do
Last edited:
Blues Man
Diamond Member
- Aug 28, 2016
- 35,513
- 14,917
- 1,530
Timeline of alleged Wisconsin protest shooter's path
A timeline of the path of Kyle Rittenhouse, the alleged Wisconsin protest shooter, at Kenosha, reconstructed in video.
abcnews.go.com
Read the article.
And I haven't thrown out the Constitution. Every state has gun laws. Tell me when WI gun laws regarding open carry were found to be unconstitutional.
Rittenhouse was breaking the law. Period.
If you don't care that he was committing a crime in WI then you cannot say you want criminals who break gun laws to be arrested and serve time without being a hypocrite
Blues Man
Diamond Member
- Aug 28, 2016
- 35,513
- 14,917
- 1,530
wrong again
I'm not Ok with violence or vigilantism
You seem to be though since you think it's OK to violate gun laws.
I merely stated a fact and did not indicate whatsoever that I supported the people who chased Rittenhouse.
The fact is the primary cause of this incident was Rittenhouse breaking WI gun laws.
He added to the problem.
Since Zimmerman???
- Banned
- #330
You're right; he was there because they were rioting and trying to burn it all down.
He sure as hell wasn't there with a rifle because of a "peaceful protest".
- Banned
- #331
Better get used to them both.
The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
www.activeresponsetraining.net
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
Blues Man
Diamond Member
- Aug 28, 2016
- 35,513
- 14,917
- 1,530
irrelevant.Better get used to them both.
From the link;The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
View attachment 385575
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.
There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.
- Banned
- #333
You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.irrelevant.Better get used to them both.
From the link;The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
View attachment 385575
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.
There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.
Blues Man
Diamond Member
- Aug 28, 2016
- 35,513
- 14,917
- 1,530
You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.irrelevant.Better get used to them both.
From the link;The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
View attachment 385575
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.
There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.
Defending your own home is not vigilantism
Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism
see the difference?
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 70,966
- 45,284
- 2,615
who did that??You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.irrelevant.Better get used to them both.
From the link;The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
View attachment 385575
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.
There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.
Defending your own home is not vigilantism
Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism
see the difference?
try and stay on topic,,
Blues Man
Diamond Member
- Aug 28, 2016
- 35,513
- 14,917
- 1,530
Rittenhousewho did that??You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.irrelevant.Better get used to them both.
From the link;The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
View attachment 385575
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.
There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.
Defending your own home is not vigilantism
Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism
see the difference?
try and stay on topic,,
pay attention
progressive hunter
Diamond Member
- Dec 11, 2018
- 70,966
- 45,284
- 2,615
he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,Rittenhousewho did that??You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.irrelevant.Better get used to them both.
From the link;The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
View attachment 385575
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.
There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.
Defending your own home is not vigilantism
Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism
see the difference?
try and stay on topic,,
pay attention
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,
lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,
- Banned
- #338
Defending oneself from assault is not "vigilantism", and the rifle seems to have been legal.You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.irrelevant.Better get used to them both.
From the link;The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
View attachment 385575
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.
There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.
Defending your own home is not vigilantism
Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism
see the difference?
You got anything to offer besides a lot of bad will towards someone you never met, over the deaths of people no one wants to meet?
Blues Man
Diamond Member
- Aug 28, 2016
- 35,513
- 14,917
- 1,530
he didnt take a gun across state lines and he worked in that city 20 miles away,,yet to be determined he was carrying illegal,,,Rittenhousewho did that??You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.irrelevant.Better get used to them both.
From the link;The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
View attachment 385575
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.
There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.
Defending your own home is not vigilantism
Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism
see the difference?
try and stay on topic,,
pay attention
and he didnt just shoot someone,,he defended himself from attackers,,,
lying about the facts doesnt help your narrative,,
He lives in Illinois
He took a rifle across state lines and carried it illegally in WI
Why don't you learn the facts instead of making shit up?
And he was breaking the law. IF he was a law abiding gun owner he would not have put himself in the position where he had to kill anyone.
You can't claim self defense in the commission of a crime.
Blues Man
Diamond Member
- Aug 28, 2016
- 35,513
- 14,917
- 1,530
He was carrying the rifle illegally. He was violating WI gun laws.Defending oneself from assault is not "vigilantism", and the rifle seems to have been legal.You said you're not okay with vigilantism or violence; if this shit keeps up, you will get a lot more of both.irrelevant.Better get used to them both.
From the link;The Future of American Policing
Written by: Greg Ellifritz I had two different friends send me messages last weekend requesting my thoughts on what policing is going to look like in the future. I thought about it quite
"Fewer and fewer people will want to be cops. That will further lower hiring and training standards. Tax revenue losses and “defunding efforts” will drive salaries down and make working conditions more difficult. The only folks who will become cops in the future are those people who have no other career options.
As more and more low quality candidates are hired, public trust for the police will further erode. The police will become continually more corrupt and inept until they are almost useless.
The really good cops (and a lot of former soldiers) will move on to better paying private security positions. The rich will hire those security people as bodyguards and neighborhood patrols.
The middle class and poor well have to contend with the corrupt police system or take care of things themselves (either by vigilante or gang action.)
This is essentially how it works in many third world countries. I have lots of experience traveling in Peru, so I’ll use the capital city of Lima as an example.
In the most affluent neighborhoods you don’t see many cops. But there are professional armed security guards at all banks, many public businesses and on roving patrol in marked vehicles in the neighborhood at night.
In the poorer neighborhoods, you don’t see many cops either. They’ll respond to something serious, but don’t expect them to investigate some kind of minor property crime without a significant bribe.
View attachment 385575
Most of the lower class residents ignore any petty criminal stuff. They band up with family or friends to handle any serious business. Sometimes the residents will pay the local criminal gangs to take care of such problems instead if they have some extra cash. The bad guy gets beaten or taken out. The cops don’t work hard to find the perpetrators of these crimes because they know exactly what is happening."
And rittenhouse was not protecting his family or his property he was playing soldier while breaking the law.
There is no comparison with law abiding gun owners defending their homes to what Rittenhouse did.
Defending your own home is not vigilantism
Taking a gun out of state carrying that gun illegally and shooting people is vigilantism
see the difference?
You got anything to offer besides a lot of bad will towards someone you never met, over the deaths of people no one wants to meet?
How ******* thick are you idiots?
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
U.S. says Cuba is prohibited from taking Russian oil as two tankers head to island- Started by Zincwarrior
- Replies: 6
-
-
Getting up to date on Cuba...they traded Venezuela for Russia, and it didn't work out well for them.- Started by Invisibleflash
- Replies: 0
-
Your 03/20/2026 Friday Moment of Zen (Ladies Edition)- Started by g5000
- Replies: 1
Latest Discussions
-
-
Veterans Affairs to be part of new presidential task force targeting fraud .
- Latest: Captain Creeper
-
-
