In alt.home.repair, on Tue, 30 Mar 2021 23:47:51 -0400, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 21:51:04 -0400, micky
wrote:

In alt.home.repair, on Tue, 30 Mar 2021 16:57:05 -0400, micky
wrote:

In alt.home.repair, on Tue, 30 Mar 2021 05:46:48 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 30, 2021 at 3:28:55 AM UTC-4, Jim Joyce wrote:
On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 00:14:55 -0400, micky wrote:

In alt.home.repair, on Mon, 29 Mar 2021 19:28:02 -0400, Dan
wrote:


https://populist.press/this-is-liter...-plan-unfolds/

WATCH: Press secretary confirms that White House is working with corporate sector to formulate 'vaccine passports'

I hope that's true. I'm glad to hear it. It means people with sense
enough to get vaccinated will have some of their freedom of movement
restoreable, and won't thave to suffer as much because of the morons who
won't get vaccinated.

Businesses could then use this credential to allow vaccinated persons admittance to events and places to which non-vaccinated persons would be denied entrance.

Damn right.
Sounds good to me. Like I heard on TV a few weeks ago, we need to make it
very inconvenient to be an anti-vaxer. I think the idiots will come around
fairly quickly.

Or stage another insurrection.

Like I said before, I wish the police had killed a few on Jan 6. I
suppose they weren't there when they were spraying poison into the cop's
face or when they were hitting someone with the flag pole, but when they
were ramming something ito the door glass of the Capitol I wish they had
fired one warning shot, then the next one into the arm that showed and
whatever else happened to be behind that arm. If that person retreated
and was replaced with someone else, afaic the next bullet should have
gone in any part of his body that was available, and if it killed him,
that would be good. I would have liked to see the crowd turn and run
when that happened. But I wouldn't want the capitol police to break
more glass than was already broken. Waste not, want not.

I suppose they were unwilling to use lethal force when the attack they
watched was only aimed at the door, and they deserve credit for
restraint, but otoh "minimum force necessary" is aiui minimum force
necessary to stop someone, and is not determined by the nature of the
force he's using. If by dint of numbers he/they can accomplish their
crime without using guns, that doesn't mean a gun shouldn't be fired to
stop them, imo. Don't want to shoot every one of them, only enough to
see them turn and leave. I really don't know either what propriety or
the law is on this, but I think if they'd killed a few, the next time
most would stay home and a few would come with guns. And when they saw
how few were there, they'd go home too. Well, maybe.

Maybe I just want them killed to make a statement that rebellion and
violence is not cost-free.

And btw, I'm not want of those who think of DC or the Capitol as a holy
place, or the embodiment of either democracy or liberty. I think it's
important, but not the extent some describe it. However because so many
others think of it that way, attacking the Capitol probably is the
embodiment of attacking democracy, liberty. and a duly eleected
government. So I wish they had killed a few.

They got one breaking into "the holy of holies" as she climbrd into
the senate chamber? Notice how nobody tried to follow her through that

Yes, exactly. I forgot about her, but she went looking for trouble and
she got it. Anyone who thinks you can break into any occupied building
with people with guns inside is really a fool. How much more so when
it's the Capitol.

window - - - If they shot the first 2 to come in through every breach
it would have either kept them out

Exactly. And I wish the guards had done that, but I was not in their
shoes and I'm not criticizing them.

or resulted in the place being
burned down.

I forget what the outside is made of. Stone I think. But the British
set it afire and I dont' think they used flame-retardant materials when
they rebuilt it. Maybe the British had to go inside to light the fire.

Trying to learn the answer to that, I find
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burnin...ash ington%22
U.S. Capitol
The United States Capitol after the burning of Washington, D.C. in the
War of 1812. Watercolor and ink depiction from 1814, restored.

The Capitol was, according to some contemporary travelers, the only
building in Washington "worthy to be noticed".[22] Thus, it was a prime
target for the British invaders, for both its aesthetic and its symbolic
value. Upon arrival into the city via Maryland Avenue, the British
targeted the Capitol (first the southern wing, containing the House of
Representatives, then the northern wing, containing the Senate).[23]
Prior to setting it aflame, the British looted the building (which at
that time housed Congress, the Library of Congress, and the Supreme
Court).

Items looted by troops led by Rear-Admiral Cockburn included a ledger
entitled "An account of the receipts and expenditures of the United
States for the year 1810"; the admiral wrote on the inside leaf that it
was "taken in President's room in the Capitol, at the destruction of
that building by the British, on the capture of Washington, 24th August,
1814". He later gave it to his elder brother Sir James Cockburn, 9th
Baronet, the Governor of Bermuda. The book was eventually returned to
the Library of Congress in 1940.[24]

The British intended to burn the building to the ground. They set fire
to the southern wing first. The flames grew so quickly that the British
were prevented from collecting enough wood to burn the stone walls
completely. However, the Library of Congress's contents in the northern
wing contributed to the flames on that side.[25] Among the items
destroyed was the 3,000-volume collection of the Library of Congress[26]
and the intricate decorations of the neoclassical columns, pediments,
and sculptures[27] originally designed by William Thornton in 1793 and
Benjamin Latrobe in 1803.[28] The wooden ceilings and floors burned, and
the glass skylights melted because of the intense heat.[25] The building
was not a complete loss; the House rotunda, the east lobby, the
staircases, and Latrobe's famous Corn-Cob Columns in the Senate entrance
hall all survived.[25] The Superintendent of the Public Buildings of the
City of Washington, Thomas Munroe, concluded that the loss to the
Capitol amounted to $787,163.28, with $457,388.36 for the North wing and
main building, and $329,774.92 for the South wing.[29]
.......

Less than four days after the attack began, a sudden, very heavy
thunderstorm—possibly a hurricane—put out the fires. It also spun off a
tornado that passed through the center of the capital, setting down on
Constitution Avenue[48] and lifting two cannons before dropping them
several yards away and killing British troops and American civilians
alike.[49] Following the storm, the British troops returned to their
ships, many of which were badly damaged. There is some debate regarding
the effect of this storm on the occupation. While some assert that the
storm forced their retreat,[48] it seems likely from their destructive
and arsonous actions before the storm, and their written orders from
Cochrane to "destroy and lay waste",[50] that their intention was merely
to raze the city, rather than occupy it for an extended period. It is
also clear that commander Robert Ross never intended to damage private
buildings as had been recommended by Cockburn and Alexander
Cochrane.[21]

All this stuff that I'd never heard before!

"Whatever the case, the British occupation of Washington lasted only
about 26 hours. Despite this, the "Storm that saved Washington", as it
became known, did the opposite according to some. The rains sizzled and
cracked the already charred walls of the White House and ripped away at
structures the British had no plans to destroy (such as the Patent
Office). The storm may have exacerbated an already dire situation for
Washington D.C. "