Sign in to follow this  
Malcolm

Crap from the Left

Recommended Posts

Jair Bolsonaro Introduces ‘New Brazil’ at Davos: ‘The Left Will Not Prevail’

 

Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro addressed the World Economic Forum at Davos on Tuesday, where he declared the country open for business while criticizing the policies and corruption of previous socialist administrations.

In what proved to be a short keynote address, the Brazilian leader made a pitch designed to excite foreign investors by promising to reduce the “heavy hand” of the state after years of sluggish growth and an economic crisis that saw skyrocketing unemployment and extensive civil unrest.

 

“I took office amid a great ethical, moral, and economic crisis,” he declared. “I want to introduce to all of you the new Brazil we are building. We are committed to changing our history.”

We will work to lower the tax burden, streamline rules and make life easier for those who want to produce and do business as entrepreneurs, invest and create jobs,” he continued. “We shall work to foster economic stability while respecting and honoring contracts … and balancing government accounts.”

Bolsonaro also spoke of his country’s extraordinary natural beauty and declared it his “mission to make progress in harmonizing environmental preservation and biodiversity, with much needed economic development.”

The 63-year-old former army captain also took aim at the left-wing governments that have dominated Latin America over the past two decades but have failed to keep power in recent years with the election of right-leaning governments in Argentina, Colombia, Peru, Chile, and Paraguay.

“We do not want to have a Bolivarian type of Latin America, as was the case in Brazil under previous administrations,” he said. “I believe that this new wave of interacting with South American countries has had a contagion effect – more center, center-right leaders have been successfully elected in these neighboring countries.”

I believe this is a clear cut response indicating that the left wing will not prevail in that region, which is a very good development in my view, not only for Latin America but for the rest of the world,” he continued. Left-wing regimes continue to prevail in neighboring Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba, all of which Bolsonaro has pledged to push back against by forming a global coalition against communism.

Bolsonaro’s speech was written and revised by his economy minister, Paulo Guedes, a U.S.-educated free marketeer. It reportedly aimed to give “the broadest message possible of the new Brazil that is presenting itself, with our arrival in power.” The trip to Switzerland was Bolsonaro’s first as the Brazilian leader. U.S. officials have previously indicated that he would visit Washington early in 2019 for a meeting with President Donald Trump.

https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2019/01/22/jair-bolsonaro-declares-new-brazil-davos-left-will-not-prevail/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE NEW FACE OF THE ..USS........aka.....THE UNITED STATES SOCIALIST PARTY.....formerly known as Democrats

Ocasio-Cortez agrees that a world that allows for billionaires is immoral

 

When asked whether “a world that allows for billionaires” is “a moral outcome,” Ocasio-Cortez responded: “No it’s not. It’s not.”

 

Freshman democratic lawmaker Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Monday appeared to agree with the idea that a world that allows for billionaires is not moral. 

The question was put to Ocasio-Cortez by The Atlantic’s Ta-Nehisi Coates at a Martin Luther King forum in New York City.

When asked whether “a world that allows for billionaires” is “a moral outcome,” Ocasio-Cortez responded: “No it’s not. It’s not.”

OCASIO-CORTEZ CALLS CLIMATE CHANGE 'OUR WORLD WAR II,' WARNS THE WORLD WILL END IN 12 YEARS

She then said that she does not believe all billionaires “like Bill Gates, for example, or Warren Buffett are immoral people."

“I’m not saying that, but I do think a system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don’t have access to public health is wrong,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

 

“I think that it’s wrong that a vast majority of the country does not make a living great wage. I think it’s wrong that you can work 100 hours and not feed your kids. I think it’s wrong that corporations like Walmart and Amazon can get paid."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-agrees-a-world-that-allows-for-billionaires-is-immoral

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And then there’s TRUDEAU from last years speech at Davos..

 

Trudeau, in Davos speech, tells global super rich that Canada won’t follow U.S. on tax cuts

In an keynote speech to the World Economic Forum, Mr. Trudeau called on corporate chief executives to put workers before profits and take major steps to boost the role of women in the work force and tackle sexual harassment.

 

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau sent a strong message to the global super rich on Tuesday that Canada won't be slashing taxes and regulatory red tape to compete with Donald Trump's America.

In an keynote speech to the World Economic Forum, Mr. Trudeau called on corporate chief executives to put workers before profits and take major steps to boost the role of women in the work force and tackle sexual harassment.

"Too many corporations have put the pursuit of profit before the well-being of their workers … but that approach won't cut it any more," Mr. Trudeau told the elite gathering at the chic ski resort of Davos. "We are in a new age of doing business – you need to give back."

Mr. Trudeau has been under pressure from Canada's business community to cut taxes and regulations to match the competitive reforms undertaken by U.S. President Donald Trump and the Republican Congress.

The Prime Minister, who also met with CEOs of several major multinationals on Tuesday to pitch for investment dollars in Canada, said too many people are being left behind by automation and globalization.

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-sends-strong-signal-canada-wont-follow-us-on-tax-cuts-at-davos/article37707544/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

‘ I never thought I'd live to see the day that the murder of children became legalized. What a cold and cruel world we are living in...”

 

HORROR: New York Set To Legalize Abortion Up To Birth

The womb will become an even less safe place for unborn babies in New York come Tuesday. Democrat legislators are set to legalize abortion up to birth and remove the fatal procedure from the state's criminal code altogether with the passing of the euphemistically named Reproductive Health Act.

 

The proposed legislation erases the current limitation on abortion in the state, which is set at 24 weeks. The Reproductive Health Act states, "every individual who becomes pregnant has the fundamental right to choose to carry the pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child, or to have an abortion."

So long as a licensed practitioner acts in "good faith," a baby can be murdered in the womb up to birth in order "to protect the patient's life or health." Notably, the meaning of the word "health" is not defined within the legislation.

"A health care practitioner licensed, certified, or authorized under title eight of the education law, acting within his or her lawful scope of practice, may perform an abortion when, according to the practitioner's reasonable and good faith professional judgment based on the facts of the patient's case: the patient is within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or there is an absence of fetal viability, or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient's life or health," reads the legislation.

The bill is set to be passed in the state legislature on Tuesday to commemorate the 46th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

"This is only the beginning of the protections that we will have for our women, for our environment, criminal-justice reform, education — the list goes on," Sen. Andrea Stewart-Cousins (D-Yonkers) told The Democrat & Chronicle, reports FaithWire. "But in January, the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we will make our statement, we will make our mark."

"The bill also removes abortion from the definition of homicide, and from the penal code entirely," reports the Times Union. "Opponents say this limits prosecutors when they look to charge individuals who harm a woman's unborn child in a domestic violence case or otherwise. Supporters say, in such cases, there remain plenty of other, much harsher criminal charges at prosecutors' disposal."

Since New York Republicans lost control of the Senate in November, the bill is expected to pass with Democrat support. Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-NY), a Catholic, is expected to sign the legislation.

"As many of you know, the Governor is pushing again for abortion through birth and even after with so-called 'Reproductive Health Act.' Now he has an anti-Life Democrat-led Senate to help him get it through," posted pro-life group New York State Right to Life via Facebook.

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/42513/horror-new-york-set-legalize-abortion-birth-amanda-prestigiacomo

 

 

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jaydee said:

‘ I never thought I'd live to see the day that the murder of children became legalized. What a cold and cruel world we are living in...”

 

HORROR: New York Set To Legalize Abortion Up To Birth

The womb will become an even less safe place for unborn babies in New York come Tuesday. Democrat legislators are set to legalize abortion up to birth and remove the fatal procedure from the state's criminal code altogether with the passing of the euphemistically named Reproductive Health Act.

 

The proposed legislation erases the current limitation on abortion in the state, which is set at 24 weeks. The Reproductive Health Act states, "every individual who becomes pregnant has the fundamental right to choose to carry the pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child, or to have an abortion."

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/42513/horror-new-york-set-legalize-abortion-birth-amanda-prestigiacomo

 

 

a "REAL REPORT" can be read at: https://www.syracuse.com/expo/news/g66l-2019/01/7a5d56a87eac4/historic-ny-abortion-vote-how-law-will-change-what-it-means-for-women.html

Part of which says:

Quote

The Reproductive Health Act changes New York's law to permit abortions after 24 weeks in case where a woman's life or health would be threatened by continuing the pregnancy

.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consider though, the more distressing notion that this policy is in response to what Liberal minded voters actually want. Then, test the attendant decay in morality that begat it and apply that to the current state of our civilization vs that of other civilizations that predated our own. Only someone who tailgates the car in front on an ice covered slippery road would be able to shed light on the thinking and rational. 

As I have said before, voting now needs to be considered mandatory with heavy sanctions for failure to participate. I simply want to ensure that we get what we truly deserve. 

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

careful what you wish for.  People thought they were getting "what they deserved" and got WHAT THEY DESERVED.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Malcolm said:

The Reproductive Health Act changes New York's law to permit abortions after 24 weeks in case where a woman's life or health would be threatened by continuing the pregnancy

Here in lies the problem for me. The slippery slope has arrived.

 

SOCIAL Factors?  EMOTIONAL Factors??

 

B4F4DE1E-B688-46DF-81D1-5DD7FF5FE0BA.jpeg

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B.C. drug possession case comes down to question of whether RCMP sniffer dog actually sat or not

 
‎Today, ‎January ‎24, ‎2019, ‏‎1 hour ago | Tyler Dawson

The question for the judge in the end was simple — did Doods, a German Shepherd police dog, sit or not?

If she did then police had grounds for searching a minivan for drugs — in which they found 27,500 pills of deadly fentanyl. But if Doods didn’t sit, then the stop and search could be considered illegal.

Unfortunately for the police, Doods was seen only to give a “partial” sit which the judge ruled was “highly ambiguous,” and certainly not a clear signal that drugs were present in the minivan.

In the end, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Michael Brundrett found in a pre-trial ruling that the search was illegal and the five 17.5-lbs bags of pills were therefore excluded from the evidence. The driver, Sandor Rigo, was acquitted.

The road to trial started from a traffic stop in April 2017. Cpl. Clayton Catellier was doing traffic patrol on Highway 1 near Chilliwack, B.C. when a brown Ford Windstar minivan ripped up behind him, some 15 kilometres per hour over the speed limit. Catellier pulled the van over.

The vehicle reeked of cologne or air freshener and Rigo was “shaking violently” at the wheel. There were multiple cellphones in the vehicle, including BlackBerrys, suspicious, because their encryption capabilities made them popular with drug dealers, the officer figured.

Combine that with Rigo’s story about driving from Calgary to Vancouver and back to buy used tires — “one of the most illogical travel stories that (Catellier) had heard in the hundreds of traffic stops that he has conducted,” wrote the judge — and that the stretch of Highway 1 between Chilliwack and Hope is a known drug corridor, and it was enough for Catellier to bring over his search dog.

Enter Doods, who, according to the ruling, had found drugs 30 to 50 times, and in training sessions, had only had a false positive — finding drugs where there were none — just one time.

Upon sniffing the car — her tail wagging and nose bouncing off the van — Doods began to signal there were drugs, Catellier said. She went “paws up,” putting her hands up on the side of the vehicle. And then, said Catellier, she tried to sit down, signalling there were drugs.

That’s when something went awry.

“This time, she went to go sit and appeared to be startled by her rear-end hitting the concrete barrier on the passenger side of the van,” said the ruling.

Still, Catellier figured the partial sit was enough: he arrested Rigo on the basis of Doods saying there were drugs present, and the quantity of cash he’d found in Rigo’s wallet during a frisk.

“The dog and the signal that the dog gives, we’re relying on that to give the police officers what they don’t have, and that is, grounds to make an arrest, detain the person, start the criminal process,” said Ottawa defence lawyer Michael Spratt. “Those are pretty extreme powers.”

A search of the vehicle on the side of the highway turned up no drugs. The police had the van towed into town where a mechanic removed the tires, so they could be searched.

No drugs were found.

Then Catellier noticed a tube of Bondo, an auto-body filler, in the rear console that he hadn’t noticed before and searched again. Inside the interior housing of the right wheel well, he found five plastic bags filled with fentanyl pills.

Rigo was charged with possession for the purpose of trafficking.

But had Doods really alerted Catellier that there were drugs? And if she hadn’t, was the search of the van legal?

An American expert witness, Andre Falco Jimenez, a former Anaheim County police officer, testified for the defence. After looking at police dash cam video, he said he didn’t believe the dog was giving any sign there were drugs.

“He described the dog as very lackadaisical … He said that dogs that make a find are typically happy, engaged, excited, and more alert because they expect to be able to play with a toy,” said the ruling.

But the judge did find, based on dash cam video and Catellier’s overall credibility, that Doods did partly sit. The key moment is obstructed in the dash cam video.

However, given that the officer had never seen a partial sit before, the judge said it could not be reasonably concluded that it was, in fact, a sign that there were drugs in the car — the sit was “highly ambiguous.”

The judge concluded that even with the subtle signs Doods was showing, such as flaring her nostrils, and the other concerns Catellier had — the aromatic minivan interior and wad of cash — the partial sit was the clinching factor in the arrest.

Since that wasn’t legitimate, the arrest violated Rigo’s Charter rights and he was acquitted.

Court challenges to a sniffer dog’s behaviour aren’t particularly common, said Spratt, and the ruling says counsel were not able to provide any other Canadian cases where a dog had given an ambiguous alert.

“When you’re looking at what the dog actually does, you’re starting from a point when you don’t have grounds to make an arrest or to engage in a search, so the dog has to get you over that hump of reasonable grounds,” said Spratt. “If the dog is equivocal in their behaviour, then it’s, I think, a legitimate argument to say it doesn’t give you that extra evidence you need.”

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in 2008 and again in 2013 on the constitutionality of sniffer dog searches, saying they’re OK.

Sniffer dogs and their competence have been more controversial in the United States. In a 2015 U.S. appeals court ruling, the judges said that the detector dog, Lex, had there been a class ranking at sniffer dog school, “would have been at the bottom of his class.” While the judges still affirmed the conviction, the defendant argued that Lex was sufficiently bad at his job that his alert shouldn’t be relied upon for the next phase of the search.

• Email: tdawson@postmedia.com | Twitter: tylerrdawson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a load of crap.  Those officers work with those dogs for their entire career.  The officer knows what the dog is indicating.  For the judge to second guess that and dismiss it is obscene.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Limbaugh: What Makes Liberals Cheer Murder?

” On Tuesday, the New York State Senate passed the euphemistically titled "Reproductive Health Act," which legalizes abortion until birth, expands who is allowed to provide abortions, and erases abortion from the state's criminal code. In video posted by Planned Parenthood New York City, abortion activists in the Senate chamber could be seen erupting in applause and cheers over the passage of the "historic" bill.”

Abortion activists, said Limbaugh, have until now made it their priority to "cloak" the fact that they are really talking about murdering unborn children in the language of "a woman's right to choose."

"It was a freedom issue or a civil rights issue — and nobody but nobody has the right to tell a woman what she can do with her body!" he said. Activists have attempted to redefine unborn children as just a mass of cells, he pointed out, and increasingly portrayed that mass of cells as a "heath risk" to women.

"It was 'an unviable tissue mass,'" said Limbaugh. "Pregnancy is 'a risky medical condition.' It can develop into a 'disease.' Then they told us that there are deep psychological problems that can result from pregnancy itself. Not abortion, but pregnancy! I mean, they built a whole lot of so-called justifications for abortion, never acknowledging that the death of a human being was happening. That was the point! It was not the death of a human being. They argued about when conception began. They said it wasn’t a human being."

In response to pro-lifers pointing out the self-evident fact that life begins at conception, the pro-abortion crowd has found ways to dismiss this, finding scientists who would back their assertion and arguing "There’s no soul there. What are you conservatives talking about? There’s no soul until the baby’s born!'' said the radio host.

"They went through every imaginable distortion and contortion to guilt or innocence everybody that they wanted to support the cause here, that we were not talking about the loss of life," he said. "If they came out and advocated for the wanton killing of children, they would have never had the popular support for it that they did."

Why were they even so into this?" asked Limbaugh. "It was a political issue. What was the benefit of this? Well, it was a hell of a fundraising issue, but it also tied inexorably to militant feminism, which meant that it tied to uber-liberalism. So it was designed to raise money. It was designed to create hatred against people who love God and believe in God. It was designed to create a divided society and culture with people that love and believe in God on one side and everybody else on the other, and then they tried to recruit as many people away from God to their side as they could." 

Rush argued that it was this reason why the pro-abortion crowd doesn't support adoption; instead, they repeatedly cite rape and incest and attempt to distort and downplay the reason the vast majority of women abort their children. Now, said Limbaugh, all that's "gone."

"But now, folks, all that’s gone now, and it’s changed — and you know, the big change is, they are giving standing ovations in the New York state Senate chamber to the killing of children!" he said. "Now they are acknowledging that that’s what’s happening, and they’re applauding it! And they’re codifying it and making it constitutional in New York. They applaud it. There was a standing O for the provision that if an attempted abortion fails, you can go ahead and finish the job after birth. They stood up, standing O."

He continued: "Do you realize this is a striking change in approach? For the longest time there wasn’t a baby involved, there wasn’t a human being. It was just a woman’s right to choose. It was just civil rights, human rights. It was an illness. It was an unviable tissue mass. It was a potential psychological problem. To get away with it, to promote it, to make sure that there were as many abortions as possible, they had to take the human element out of it — and they did. Now they’re making no effort whatsoever to hide what’s happening. They are opening celebrating what’s happening."

"The last time something like this happened was in World War II!" he added. "You’re not supposed to bring that up, by the way, in relation to abortion. ... So abortion now is an approved method of killing, whereas it used to just be about 'a woman’s right to choose,' a civil rights issue."

Limbaugh then got to his primary question: "Why?" Why are they now willing to openly cheer the murder of viable unborn children?

 

 

 

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/42638/limbaugh-what-makes-liberals-cheer-murder-james-barrett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems a universal truth, those who summon the spectre of Hitler to support their antagonism toward a perceived injustice think nothing of actually emulating his tactics in support of their version of justice. 

Predictable but sad none the less. Perhaps made even sadder by the very nature of liberal predictability.

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. ...

“Wisdom: the quality of having knowledge, experience, and good judgment.”

Or, IMHO, knowing what to do with those qualities. Wisdom feeds on knowledge and experience and promotes good judgement. We live in a world sadly lacking in experience and long on information (information and knowledge are not the same). Six months in Africa should be a requirement for voter registration.

I can produce reams of information proving the world is flat.

I would like to hear a compelling argument  in support of abortion during delivery. If I were to play the devils advocate and try to think of one, I would come up short. Either moral or legal would be fine but I would appreciate both... any takers? Is there something I haven't thought of here?

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Wolfhunter said:

I would like to hear a compelling argument  in support of abortion during delivery. If I were to play the devils advocate and try to think of one, I would come up short. Either moral or legal would be fine but I would appreciate both... any takers? Is there something I haven't thought of here?

I haven't yet had time to do a careful study of the new law and it's implications but I intend to.  My understanding of it so far is that it's meant to be an extension of the current law with the main idea being that a woman's health must never be subordinate to the health of the embryo/fetus/child - even to the point of birth.   I do not agree with this - just trying to get a handle on what it is, and why.  The problem, of course, is that "they" are including the woman's mental health so it's completely open-ended with no actual concrete limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, seeker said:

a woman's health must never be subordinate to the health of the embryo/fetus/child

A courageous position and well worthy of polite debate wrt mental health issues. I think you are right about no concrete limits and I fear it's open ended and thus rife for partisan abuse.

To my simple (and non legal mind), the first hurdle to overcome is the premise that minutes before birth, the baby isn't human unless deemed to be so by the mother. There are many examples where the status of being considered "non-human" has been the cause (or at least catalyst) of atrocities.... ISIS executions and slavery come immediately to mind since slaves and apostates are deemed unworthy of personhood by those who would seek to harm them. As was the case with slavery, Democrats find themselves on the wrong side of history yet again IMO.

Ironically, most states consider any crime against pregnant women that results in the death of the baby to be a homicide. When the status of "personhood" is left to another individual to assign its worth according to their own values.... we are all in trouble.

 

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disturbing enough when considered in isolation IMO.... but all the more so by being heralded as something to celebrate... then made worse by the choice and context of the venue used to celebrate. I'm glad I don't have to defend any aspect of this on its merits, I would be at a complete loss come debate time. I find the Democratic and Liberal parties I once supported to be unrecognizable and completely unsupportable on virtually every issue now.

The historical context curve is fixed and unrelenting, as is their new doctrine of being proudly (I say arrogantly) on the wrong side of it.

Although unrelated to the issue at hand, this sort of thing only serves as further affront toward a system of governance that is becoming increasingly problematic and bordering on unrecognizable in its headlong rush to be counted progressive.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-soft-justice-undermines-trust-in-the-system

This fool has since relented, but the attitude is indicative of the type of petty meanness and self entitlement that I find both pervasive and worrisome now. 

https://globalnews.ca/news/4913887/possible-maga-hat-ban-california-restaurant-controversy/

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jaydee said:

Caution....Not for the feint of heart or the squeamish!

 

I think the warning on that video should be much, much larger.  Like this:  

The following video will tell you things you do not want to know and will forever scar your psyche!  Do not watch it!

Edited by seeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? People need warnings so they can retreat to their safe spaces and think happy thoughts?

Seriously now, how did you think this worked? What did you think happened?

How did people become so dangerously disconnected with reality and from the natural forces of the universe. Good Lord did everyone think this was "the concept of poof?" It's a world of stupid out there and the number of people who grew up on farms is dwindling. 

To me, the only surprise here is that any Dr would preform the procedure.

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Wolfhunter said:

Really? People need warnings so they can retreat to their safe spaces and think happy thoughts?

Seriously now, how did you think this worked? What did you think happened?

How did people become so dangerously disconnected with reality and from the natural forces of the universe. Good Lord did everyone think this was "the concept of poof?" Hoist this aboard, those arms and legs would still be moving.... time to grow up eh?

Guess I should have used the emoticon after all - falsely assumed that based on my long history of being irreverent and sarcastic that it wasn't needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a long history of not meaning YOU when I say "you". Usually I indicate that but I do it so often I tend to forget now. For the record though, many would complain about the graphic nature of the video and most would be in favour of late term abortions; they simply don't want to know. The level of willful ignorance and insulation from reality is simply mind blowing....

Edited by Wolfhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Wolfhunter said:

I have a long history of not meaning YOU when I say "you". Usually I indicate that but I do it so often I tend to forget. For the record though, many would complain about the graphic nature of the video and most would be in favour of late term abortions..... they simply don't want to know.

Well - Zing! - got me.

Yes, you are correct anyone who is in favour of late-term abortions definitely does not want to know the details - hence the way they will freak out if faced with a picture, description of the procedure or even referring to the child/fetus as anything other than a "bundle of cells".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this