It truly is just so chilly lately and I love it. I enjoy summery days too, I just prefer them few and far between and I like feeling cosy and rugged up as opposed to wanting to shed my skin for some relief.
It’s my honeys birthday :) I’m going to make a concerted effort to not be too much. I can’t be too much anyway from here but still. I wanted to send him an ubereats voucher for his dinner tonight but it turns out I can’t send it internationally :( It has to be the same currency. I also don’t have his bank account so I can’t just chuck some money in there either. I just want to make him feel special and loved and I thought that was a tiny yet cute gesture. Oh well. It’s his birthdaaaaay! I’m so happy he was born and became who he is and the fact he’s all mine
I’m struggling with my mood a bit recently. Or depression. Whatever you want to call it. I don’t like either word. But flat or empty doesn’t always cover it, just because I feel depressed doesn’t automatically equate to flat/grey/empty/numb/etc. They’re a specific feeling, I can be and feel depressed and not feel any of them - I can just feel detached from life, I guess. Idk. It’s hard to put into words, I’m sure I could find some writer who articulates it perfectly but even then, that’s their feeling, not mine. But I really like reading and hearing relatable feelings, I can feel alone a lot and hearing others feeling the same as me makes me feel less so. Truly Captain Obvious over here. But anyway. I’m struggling more again lately. The last few days. It’s not PMS related, it’s deeper than that. There’s a difference.
Truly anyone can have a podcast, can’t they? I’m listening to one now about book theories and they’re just talking over one another and being quite rude and dismissive and then I realise this is just content I disagree with but their theories have so many holes in them. SO MANY. It’s basically one hole with a flimsy fabric of theory around the outside. So now I’m hate listening because it’s making me grind my teeth and my eye twitch, but no one else has any podcasts about this and I wanna listen to some. It just sounds like they don’t even like each other? I felt so awkward for a lot of it. Also they’re so unprepared, like if you’re going to spout theories then a) know what you’re talking about b) back it up c) look for holes in it and point them out because that’s half the fun and d) you can’t base a theory off of something you don’t even know. Eg. One of them was talking about how X was Y’s dad but neither knew if X was even alive. Like… ? Also none of them are original theories which tbh I don’t care about, it’s just nice to have them condensed into an episode to listen to, but they were so rude and dismissive of the original poster or whatever several times, it made me feel quite uncomfy? So bizarre. I want to not like these books anymore. It’s not fun anymore, everyone’s so hateful and I was reading how people are literally sending death threats to one another because they disagree with their ship or whatever it’s called. Like here’s a thought, THEYRE FICTIONAL AND WHO CARES, GET OFF THE INTERNET AND CALM DOWN. Says me, all in caps, on the internet. I love irony. But so it’s just not an enjoyable fandom anymore which is a shame because I think it’s my first ever I’ve been a part of? And now it’s just… ruined. I also don’t like how divisive it all is, like if you love one character then you hate the other and things. Like here’s a thought everyone, each character is nuanced and is not perfect - stop expecting them to be. And stop bitching and moaning like jfc. So anyway it’s not very enjoyable anymore which is a shame but I’ll just enjoy the books themselves in private and wait til the next is released in presumably the next 8-10 business years. I also don’t have high expectations after the last book in her other series, it was terrible. So rushed and so… it was terrible. Enjoyable enough but I will never reread it, I’ll never reread that series full stop. We’ll never say never but I would be incredibly surprised if I did considering I didn’t like it at all and just read it because I’m a sucker fan girl and they all eventually link together so I kind of have to.
I hate computers and technology and all of it. And by that I mean it’s all excellent and amazing but I am cursed with it. I tried to switch my monitors and things around this morning to be better but now everything is just… wrong. Laggy.
Am I a bad person for considering applying for other roles purely for leverage with my own? Yes. I already know the answer to that. I’m open to working elsewhere, but I’m also not. I’m frustrated right now with what I get lumped with workwise but ultimately we have excellent benefits, I can wfh x3 days a week and my manager is super understanding of my… issues. I kind of want a new job elsewhere because I think it would force me out of my comfort zone, but also… Is that the best thing? I would normally say yes but some days I find everything so so difficult and taking on new processes, a new team, a new environment… it’s a lot. And I know I get very easily overwhelmed. And the fact I have more or less unlimited paid sick leave which tbh I don’t really utilise at all and easily use less than what I’m legislatively entitled to but it’s there. So I feel kind of stuck. And I also feel unsure. One part of me wants to be leading large nationwide change processes or being entirely responsible for project work, but the other part of me knows I’m probably not currently best equipped for that… issues wise. I’m sure I could, but I just struggle so much some days and what if that day I had 5+ redundancy meetings? Having a god awful day and then telling multiple people their role has been disestablished…? Being a part of that process is one thing and I’ve done that and it’s fine, it’s tough at times but fine, but to be actively responsible for the whole process? I just don’t really think I can handle that. Which holds me back. And also the delegation of work SUCKS. And I get stuck training and basically managing the junior team members because my manager can’t seem to do it. Which tbh is fair as she has a tonne on her plate but still, she had that all on her plate before becoming all of our manager so I mean… yknow. Sometimes I wonder if I could go people leadership route, a small part of me thinks I would be good at it, I can definitely listen and I definitely show compassion and patience with our junior members and I can delegate work out easily enough buuuut do I have the confidence to advocate for them? When it comes to pay/promotions? I’m not sure. I’d have every confidence in them but not in myself and if I have no confidence in myself it makes brig bold and pushing for something impossible, like impossible. So. I wouldn’t want to risk someone else’s progression because I’m a damn baby. So idk. So what doI do? I mean I don’t even want to specialise in ER, it’s too much. I want to get involved and build my experience and knowledge more and more, but it can be really tough. Even the other day I was talking to a young woman, younger than me, with cancer. Or rather she was telling me she’s now in remission and pregnant and I honestly couldn’t stop smiling it was such lovely news, but things like that, or an employee displaying shifts in behaviour and it being a result of domestic violence and then having to handle that or just the process of disestablishing roles aka making someone redundant, I guess there’s redeployment which would feel good but still. It’s an emotionally taxing side of HR that I’m unsure I could handle long term. I’m only thinking about this again this morning because I saw a job which does less than I do now getting around $10k more than I earn. Anyway I’ll just keep at it where I am a while longer. It’s probably better for me, right now anyway.
He showed me his recent favourite music last night, it’s one of my favourite favourite things. I tend to like/love majority of it, some I don’t but that’s fine like everyone has different tastes - I think it would be weird to like all of it. It baffles me how controlled his Spotify is, it makes mine look utterly manic… which tbh it is. I just get so.. something, and start making new playlists or adding new things or whatever it might be. Anyway I’m listening to some of the ones he sent me last night today.
He took basically half an hour to call me last night and I know he said he had been talking to his mum but it just felt… weird. And then he didn’t pick up his phone at midnight when I called to say happy birthday, he admittedly called back really quickly but idk. It made me feel uneasy. Like what’s he doing at midnight that he can’t pick up his phone? When I know he’s awake. I know I’m feeling weird about nothing, so it’s fine. It just felt… I don’t know. His sleeping patterns are slipping so quickly lately, it feels like it’s every two weeks not every month like it used to be, and it makes me wonder why. It makes me think things like he doesn’t have a weird sleeping pattern ever and he just uses it as a reason to avoid me because he’s with someone else and how would I know. I don’t think these thoughts are true, I don’t think he’s lying about it all, but it’s just a recurring thought lately. Ever since it became more frequent with less time in between. It’s fine. I know it’s fine. I know there’s nothing wrong, it’s just sometimes idk. I think it’s more fear and worry than anything relating to genuine belief and mistrust.
I love him a lot. A whole lot. The entire lot. I hope he’s having the best sleep with the sweetest dreams. Baby.
I really don’t feel well this afternoon. I feel vaguely crampy and tired but my mood has dropped significantly. I’m trying to perk back up so I don’t wreck his birthday though. It’s not just general it’s entirely work related. I feel like I need to cry and punch a wall and just throw my computer at the window but in a sad not angry way. I am fed up. And so many stupid questions. Like twice today I’ve had PEOPLE IN MY TEAM be like “what’s the link for this” like here’s an idea why don’t you go find it and use some fucking initiative. It’s just pure laziness. So I said you can find it on X and then didn’t help further because what the actual fuck. And it’s literally a link to the system login - how the fuck do they not know this. Which leads me to believe it’s pure laziness. Because they have f all cases either. Anyway I’m just lashing out because I’m frustrated and in a sad mood. Everything’s fine.
I love Jeff Buckley so much. Not all of his stuff, I could take or leave much of it tbh but some of his music… all time favourites. I wonder what my top five would be? I think: - lover you should’ve come over - Last goodbye - Forget her - Lilac wine - Nightmares by the sea I didn’t include hallelujah because that goes without saying, I much prefer it to Leonard Cohen’s one however I would really like to try give Leonard more of a go because mum loves him, I think she saw him live last time he was here, I was going to buy her tickets as a random present before she beat me to it - unless I’m confusing it with someone else? I don’t think so. Maybe. Or was it Nick Cave? Idk. I already like Nick Cave a whole lot, I had a big massive A2 poster of him on my wall as a teenager. Anyway. I also left out so real and grace and I know it’s over and mojo pin to some extent. And dream brother. Okay so the entire grace album + some extras. His only proper album :( anyway I love him and he soothes melancholic little heart and has for a long time. Since I was… 17. 16? Something.
I don’t click easily with people. I was thinking about that today because I felt more lonely than normal. I find it easy to be personable and friendly and all of that, but it’s rare that I feel at ease with someone and like I can somewhat be myself/not overthink into oblivion. And I don’t know why some people are different? It’s not a time thing either, because the people I find myself more at ease with I felt it more or less instantly, whereas I’ve been around the same people for YEARS and… nothing. Like M, I felt at ease with her from day one. K too a bit. Andy definitely. But other women at work? I’ve known them for years, spoken to them daily, I still feel uncomfortable and anxious and paralysed with them. Paralysed in the sense I can’t think of things to say, I can and do but it can be such stilted conversation. Even my own family members, my brother and his wife? Just like that. I don’t feel at all comfortable or anything. I know I naturally find it easier with talkative people, M and Andy for example - both could talk to a brick wall and either not notice or get it to talk back. I don’t mean the not notice in a negative way, I just mean… idk what I mean. It’s a good thing though. I just don’t find it easy. I know a lot of it is due to my social anxiety and the worry and all of that. I think it’s also that I don’t like surface level relationships, but I don’t tend to allow people in enough to get anything further than surface level. I can easily have those conversations, I just don’t really enjoy them. But it can be impossible to go further because I’m so closed off and I’m so riddled with anxiety over saying the wrong thing, unintentionally offending someone or showing how stupid I am that nothing happens. I also don’t like to talk that much, I do but in bursts, and I think that doesn’t help me either. I know I’m the problem. Another thing to add to my list of difficulties.
I wish I could just escape myself sometimes.
I’m due to start reading HP3 now, why don’t I feel psyched about it? I want to. Maybe when I get fully into it I will? I’ve been apprehensive about books in the past and went on to become obsessed and it become a part of my identity, if even for a short while. And if I know anything in life, it’s that HP fans tend to turn it into a personality trait. Maybe that’ll be me.
I don’t really want to journal anymore. I feel sad and it doesn’t tend to help me perk up and I need to force myself into being chirpy and perky and all those sorts of adjectives so I don’t ruin his day. My baby.
I ordered dinner - tofu stirfry with roti yummm - so I’ll have that, maybe start HP3 and then have a shower and then spend time with my honeybunny. Night night

What is the rule of divorce? Divorce is the legal termination of a marriage between two individuals. It is a complex and emotional process that can have significant financial and emotional consequences for both parties involved. In this article, we will discuss the rules of divorce and how they vary across different countries.
What is the rule of divorce? What is the rule of divorce? In the United States, divorce laws vary from state to state. The process of divorce typically involves filing a petition for divorce with the family court in the state where the couple resides. The petition must state the grounds for divorce, such as adultery, cruelty, or irreconcilable differences. If the other party contests the petition, the case may go to trial, where a judge will decide the outcome. In most states, there is a mandatory waiting period before a divorce can be finalized, typically ranging from 30 to 90 days. During this time, the couple may attempt to reconcile or negotiate the terms of the divorce, such as property division, child custody, and alimony. If the parties cannot reach an agreement, the court will intervene and decide based on state law and the best interests of the children involved.
In some countries, such as India, divorce laws are more complex and heavily influenced by religious and cultural beliefs. In India, divorce is governed by several laws, including the Hindu Marriage Act, the Muslim Personal Law, and the Christian Marriage Act. The grounds for divorce vary depending on the law, but they generally include adultery, cruelty, desertion, and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.
In India, divorce is often a lengthy and expensive process, requiring the involvement of lawyers, mediators, and family members. The court may also require the couple to undergo counseling or mediation to attempt to reconcile before granting a divorce. Child custody, alimony, and property division are also contentious issues that can further complicate the process.
In Muslim countries, divorce is governed by Sharia law, which provides for specific rules and procedures for divorce. Under Sharia law, a husband can initiate divorce by pronouncing talaq, or divorce, three times. The wife may also initiate divorce, but she must provide grounds for divorce, such as cruelty or abandonment.
What are some common grounds for divorce in different countries? In different countries, various common grounds for divorce may be recognized by the legal systems. These grounds can vary depending on the jurisdiction and cultural factors. Here are some common grounds for divorce observed in different countries:

1. Adultery: Adultery, which refers to one spouse engaging in a sexual relationship outside of the marriage, is often considered a valid ground for divorce in many countries. It is seen as a breach of trust and can be a significant factor in the breakdown of a marriage.
   
2. Cruelty or Abuse: Physical, emotional, or mental cruelty or abuse towards a spouse can be a recognized ground for divorce. This includes actions that cause harm, fear, or distress to the other spouse, making it impossible to continue the marriage.
   
3. Desertion or Abandonment: Desertion occurs when one spouse abandons the other without a valid reason or consent. It can be a ground for divorce if the abandonment persists for a specific period, as defined by the laws of the country.
   
4. Irreconcilable Differences: Many countries recognize the concept of irreconcilable differences as a ground for divorce. It refers to situations where the couple's fundamental incompatibilities or disagreements make it impossible to maintain a healthy and functional marriage.
   
5. Substance Abuse or Addiction: In some countries, substance abuse or addiction, such as alcoholism or drug addiction, can be grounds for divorce. The impact of these issues on marriage and family life can be significant, leading to irreparable damage.
   
6. Financial Misconduct: In certain jurisdictions, financial misconduct, such as financial fraud, hiding assets, or excessive gambling, can be considered a valid ground for divorce. It reflects a breach of financial trust within the marriage.
   
7. Mental Illness: Mental illness or incapacity can sometimes be grounds for divorce. If a spouse is suffering from a severe mental health condition that affects their ability to fulfill marital obligations or poses a risk to the well-being of the other spouse, divorce may be an option.
   
8. Incompatibility: Incompatibility refers to a situation where the couple realizes they are not compatible or have grown apart over time. While this ground may not be recognized in all jurisdictions, some countries acknowledge it as a valid reason for divorce.
   

It is important to note that the specific grounds for divorce can vary significantly depending on the laws and cultural norms of each country. It is advisable for individuals seeking divorce to consult with legal professionals familiar with the jurisdiction to understand the applicable grounds and procedures. Can you provide some examples of how financial misconduct is defined and proven as a valid ground for divorce in certain jurisdictions? Certainly! In certain jurisdictions, financial misconduct can be defined and proven as a valid ground for divorce. Here are some examples of how it may be defined and proven:

1. Hiding Assets: One example of financial misconduct is when a spouse intentionally conceals assets or income during the divorce proceedings. This can involve transferring funds to undisclosed accounts, undervaluing assets, or manipulating financial records to deceive the other spouse and the court.
   
2. Excessive Spending or Gambling: If one spouse engages in reckless spending habits or has a gambling addiction that significantly impacts the couple's financial stability, it can be considered financial misconduct. Evidence such as bank statements, credit card records, or testimonies from financial experts may be used to demonstrate this misconduct.
   
3. Financial Fraud: Financial fraud can involve fraudulent activities such as forging signatures, falsifying financial documents, or engaging in fraudulent business transactions to deceive the other spouse. This kind of misconduct can seriously affect the financial well-being of the other spouse and the overall stability of the marriage.
   
4. Dissipation of Marital Assets: Dissipation of marital assets refers to a situation where one spouse intentionally wastes or depletes marital assets for personal gain or to prevent the other spouse from receiving a fair share during the divorce settlement. Examples may include excessive spending on personal expenses, extravagant gifts for a third party, or transferring assets to others to avoid division.
   
5. Economic Abuse: Economic abuse occurs when one spouse exerts control over the other spouse's financial resources and restricts their access to money. This can involve denying access to bank accounts, controlling all financial decision-making, or sabotaging the other spouse's employment opportunities. Evidence such as financial records, testimonies, or witness accounts may be used to support claims of economic abuse.
   

To prove financial misconduct as a valid ground for divorce, it is essential to gather relevant evidence, such as financial records, bank statements, receipts, witness testimonies, or expert opinions. Consulting with an experienced family law attorney can provide guidance on the specific requirements and procedures for proving financial misconduct in a particular jurisdiction

Did some data tracking because i had boring moment. After 50 deaths : How many bullets killed me ( mcw is 5/ mors is 1 for example ) Average was less than 2 bullets per one kill against me
Eveyone having pocket sniper is biggest issue so far and playing on pc lobbies where mnk players enjoy playing sniper only it makes gameplay flow bad.
I have 3 options.
1 Smoke and hope for the best and get good timing 2 wait first minute when sniper battle is over move around map 3 Use sniper too
Love longer ttk but its amazing how bad job they did with almost every new one shot weapon.
450wins 550 loses 2.5kd. sbmm atleast doing good job
Most of the maps has 1 or 2 lanes where you have no place to be without sniper so often feels like my play options are so limited when i cant peek or do anything against them. 3/4 lasers moving around its not fun

So, how do y'all come up with ultimate abilities? I can't seem to come up with anything, im talking about things similar to bankai or domain expansion, the "pinnacle" of an ability
I don't know if its just that these kinds of abilities dont fit into my magic system, which i will kinda summ up down
Its heavily inspired out of jjk curse system
At first we have
•mediums: people capable of seeing and interacting with spirits
•exorcist: people whose job is to get rid of spirits under the name of a big organization all over the globe, they're not really common knowledge as most of the world population is not aware of spirits
•spirit hunters: some sort of private exorcist for mediums or non mediums who have knowledge about spirits but dont wanna resort to calling an actual exorcist, most of the spirit hunters do it for the money, but some just dont wanna work under the exorcist organization
•spirits: once a person dies, theres a possibility that they become a spirit, the younger the spirit is, the stronger it is, they have some kind of "bodies" which are semi intangible and kinda function like non newtonian fluid, theres two types of spirits, wild spirits which are always hostile, and tamed spirits which while not hostile they can still be problematic. Cluster spirits can form when multiple souls exists in one spirit's body, they are untameable and you cant neither fuse or absorb them (fusion and absorption explained bellow)
Haunteds: people who wild or tamed spirits follow them, which doesn't always carry a negative thing, but it does in a majority of cases
Possesseds: people or corpses whose body has been taken by a spirit, not inherently evil since this is the method some tamed spirits use to pass normally into society
Last part until going into abilities: sometimes, when they spend a lot of time with a person, spirits can start to become visible and can interact with their surroundings like they were people again, but this is not always the case, in some other cases, spirits get so conscious and tangible that they can be considered almost actual people and can sometimes manifest without the person they're following, however they cant interact if they're not with said person, only be seen, this is extremely uncommon and theres only a few known cases
Now to the actual abilities part. Innate abilities are rare so almost no one has one and those who have it most of the time dont count with anything impressive, what mediums resort to is either absorption or fusion with spirits, through weakening and taming a spirit, you can decide if to fuse with it or absorb it which means
•Fusion: once you have fused with a spirit, you cannot absorb or fuse with another one, fusing gives you the ability of said spirit, however you must learn to use it on your own, since in most cases that spirit will not talk to you, as well, your life is shortened to the spirit's life span, for example, if you fused with the spirit of a 15 year old, from that moment on, you will only have 15 years of life left.
You cannot fuse normally with cluster spirits, there is only one known case which is not important, since its the same thing but these rather just count with a more powerful ability
•Absorption: you can choose to absorb spirits, however you cant fuse with spirits if you have absorbed one, theres no known limit to the amount of spirits one can absorb, and you can summon the spirits you have absorbed to fight with you, however these will be a weakened version of their original self and you will not be able to use any possible application of their abilities if the original spirit didn't do it before, spirits that are haunting people but rather because they like them, functiong exactly the same than these absorbed spirits, but without their disadvantages, both haunting and absorbed spirits will develop a consciousness and presence as it was mentioned above

Ok why are controllers getting so much shit.
I can't understand it. When you're a controller you are expected to do everything. And if you don't well get ready for a mouthful. And if you do everyone acts like you didn't do anything impressive and simply did your job.
Example. If you are the last person alive as a controller. (Which is rather common) You are expected to clutch 1vx. And when you obviously fail because your kit wasn't made for duels and because you have a ghost against 5 operators your whole team shits on you.
But if you somehow do there's a bigger chance that the enemy will say wp before your team does. They act as if that's what you do daily.
I can't understand why this is such a thankless job.
(Here's a medal for every controller main out there. 🏅)

This isn’t ideal advice but I figure I would post this just in case it helps anyone lol! I just had an awakening (after a bad panic attack at work) that the best way for me, ( I hope it works for you too but I’m sure this isn’t gonna be the cure for everyone) to help suppress panic attacks is distraction! This usually requires finding the trigger first though. But if you got that down, distraction might help you too? (I hope) here are my examples on things that get my panic attacks going and what I’ve found helps.
Driving- my panic attack stems from the fear of crashing, I got in a bad accident in 2019 and ever since then it’s been BAD > what I did to fix this was blasting loud and distracting music in my car to drown out the fear
Eating or even drinking (the fear here is that I will choke) > I fixed this sort of by never eating out in restaurants. I’ll eat at-home only and have the TV on really loud to distract myself from my fear while I eat.
When someone rambles to me verbally for too long. I don’t think there’s particularly any fear in this one, but it just makes me experience depersonalization and that’ll snowball into a panic attack. > This is rude asf but I usually keep one AirPod in always in social settings, I’ll just kinda smile and nod and only halfway pay attention to the conversation, and put my music up kinda loud to keep me distracted and grounded. Not the ideal fix, but I’ve cut down on panic attacks induced this way significantly. If I’m close to the person, I will explain that too much rambling is gonna mess me up, but this trick has helped me a ton at work.

side note, lectures in college are the WORST for this trigger. This isn’t realistic for everyone but I’ll just teach myself the content at home prior to class and just completely ignore the whole lecture. (Headphones in, doodle in my notebook or online shopping or anything) If attendance isn’t required, I just never go. Or if you go to your school’s accommodations office and explain the situation, sometimes they allow in-person attendance for tests and labs but the lecture portion remote . I did this for two semesters in the past

Sleep deprivation- this one is a vicious cycle because my panic attacks keep me awake too many hours of the day, and I’ve noticed being sleep deprived makes the panic attacks way worse. > But keeping myself busy and distracted during my work or school day (playing on my phone, focusing on studying, listening to music, doing busy work) has cut down on this. I picked up a bunch of 3rd shifts at my job and it’s made the sleep deprivation panic attacks way worse, because there’s not much to do. I’m going to switch back to 1st or 2nd shift.
Socially- I noticed socially induced panic attacks are their worst when it’s lots of noise and too many people talking at once. This can’t always be done but blasting music in AirPods while half-assing the social interaction has helped
Shopping- something about the bright lights seem to f me up. AirPods + sunglasses indoors has fixed it (goofy fix, but I’d rather get weird looks than panic) + online shopping and rather drive up has saved me.
Apologies that some of these fixes aren’t really too realistic for everyone, but I figure I’d post it just in case any of it helps anyone.

(I’m going to preface this with if you are in my squadron and know the context of this post or know me, please just leave it. I don’t know where else to go and I don’t know how to make this post vague enough to get the right help.)
I’m a SrA in a very, very small shop in a large squadron. Since it’s small, I’m second in charge under a SSgt. We have another SrA who we’ll call Bob. Bob has a severe alcohol problem and has had several instances because of this. All instances, leadership knows about including some that have led to worries that Bob might hurt himself (including suicidal ideations). Bob had another instance that was the worst yet very recently that involved them getting seriously hurt on the job that the hospital said was due to alcohol withdrawal.
My issue is with the “solution”. Bob was given medication and 96hr quarters to help them with alcohol withdrawal. These medications apparently have wild side effects and my job is to check on Bob randomly, once a day, to ensure they don’t have alcohol in their room. If I find any, I pour it out and tell SSgt. I don’t know what happens after that, if anything.
This solution means Bob, an alcoholic with possible suicidal ideations, is left alone in his room with a new medication, a 2 minute walk from the shoppette/alcohol, and I’m responsible for making sure he doesn’t have alcohol in his room.
Our leadership has failed time and time again with helping Bob (prime example was during one of the moments I thought he might hurt himself and I was on leave, all our shirt did was send one of our new E-2s to go to Bobs room and ‘make sure he’s good’) and I’m genuinely afraid that something terrible is going to happen and my leadership couldn’t give two shits. This has gone up to the Sq CC level and that was their solution.
I don’t know who to go to, what to do besides be there for Bob which I can’t be 100% of the time. I don’t know what to do and I need help.

TL;DR I lived over a year with my Aunt, was hell, got kicked out during covid.
So this will be a bit long as there is alot to unpack here so ill start with a bit of background on me. I am currently a 26 year old female, this took place mostly when I was 21-22. I should also say, I am not a sociopath, I do have mental issues which I'll briefly explain in a moment, but none of these issues is being a Sociopath.
Before this story I had a very strong relationship with both my aunt and uncle. I had been living with my parents but they were moving to a new state and I at the time didn't want to leave my life behind. So my aunt and uncle offered me to move in, originally no rent required or any expectations of me.
This seemed like a great idea, I could grow to be my own person and start healing from some really bad experiences I had prior, a story for another day there. However i really had absolutely no idea just how bad this would turn out for me.
The first few months were great, I got a new job nearby at a grocery store. I got myself a therapist for my mental issues, short list for context. I had developed a severe depression at a young age and had a history of attempted self deletion and self harm, i have a severe anxiety which is now worse today, PTSD, and three I was born with, Dyslexia, ADHD and Autism. Despite all of these i was starting to actually function as a normal member of society thanks to my therapist.
For the first time in my life i actually began to feel good about myself, i wasn't judged on my clothes, i wasn't judged on my eating habits and i wasn't judged on doing my art projects or my gaming. I even got myself a tattoo of a roaring tiger turning into a dagger on my shoulder. Its still awesome today.
Then it happened, I apparently broke the water filter on the fridge, so like the responsible adult I was trying to be i offered to pay for it, and I did. Then bought myself a filter water bottle so i didn't break the fridge filter again. Now i wouldn't know this until months later but apparently this was taken as me being spiteful. How is this spiteful you may ask, your guess is as good as mine.
Then a few weeks later my little sister spent three days with me at my aunts place, i took care of her and everything was fine i went to work on the last day and came home to chaos. So im still not entirely sure what exactly happened, but the microwave, which was in perfect condition before work, was broken in a strange way. The glass on the microwave door was... shattered? Im not entirely sure how to describe it, but it looked as if someone tried to break the microwave door off the microwave. Not something my at the time 14 year old sister had the strength to do, but she was being blamed.
So here I am trying to be responsible and just solve the issue by offering to pay for a new microwave as I knew it wasn't my sister, but someone had to fix this issue and I felt it was my responsibility to protect my sister. So i bought a new microwave, leading into this next issue.
My aunt said i spent too much money and offered to help me save. The original deal was i give her 400$ a month and she puts it away for savings. I was stupid and young thinking no way my family would screw me so I didn't get this in writing. I never saw this "savings" as she used all of my money. But hey this may be half of my monthly money but at least im not having to buy my own food and hygiene products.
I was so wrong, two weeks later I wasn't allowed to eat their food or expect them to buy my shampoo and body wash. Well thats no big deal, I surely make enough and the money im giving my aunt will be for moving out once i find a place. I did not make enough in between paying my therapist, my phone bill, my rent and trying to buy my own food i was broke.
Then my aunt would request me to bring home groceries with the promise to pay me back, then never did. Heres an example, one day my aunt asked that I bring her home an entire lemon pepper rotisserie chicken, that about 10$, I only made 10$ an hour. So i buy it, bring it home and stand there waiting for my money as she start eating it right there, i was appalled by what she said "no you cant have any, this is my food. Go away."
Eventually I ate maybe once every three days and my therapy sessions weren't working as my therapist began claiming I was just over dramatic when I talked about how useless I was beginning to feel. Eventually found out my therapist and aunt were close and they talk about me alot, my therapist even telling my aunt everything I said in therapy.
Then covid started and this is when it got worse. My aunt claimed I was a sociopath, what was her evidence you ask. I didn't yawn when other people yawned. Suddenly any small mistake I made was "a vindictive attack". Forgot to throw away a ramen wraper, "I left it there out of spit". Don't rotate my laundry at the exact moment the cycle ends, "I'm purposely in the way so she cant do her laundry". God forbid i leave my adult toy on my bed in my closed room. "You are a woman! You dont need Satisfaction from anything but a man!" That was a huge incident that really screwed me up.
She also had a habit of opening my mail and reading it, trying to push me off to random guys when they dragged me to bars and casino's. I don't like going to either im not a big drinker and I hate gambling. Lets not forget what happened when i told her I was Bi.
"You are either born straight or you are born gay, and you were born straight, being bisexual is a perversion! If you ever date a woman I will disown you!"
So naturally my Girlfriends were kept secret. By October 2020 my aunt claimed she couldn't deal with me anymore and kicked me out, so i moved to my parents as i had no money because she never gave me that "savings" money. My aunt then disowned me after she kicked me out, at first I was distraught as I truly had no idea what I had done so wrong living with her.
An unfortunate side effect of Autism is you truly dont understand why people react the way they do, and most people don't care enough to take the extra time to talk to us. We are also unfortunately easy to manipulate and break apart. That year I spent with my aunt was meant to build me up, instead it did alot of damage to me mentally. Oh and I dont trust therapists anymore.
To this day I still haven't talked to my aunt and I now always make sure there is a contract made for anything involving money, family or not. To this day, my aunt still belives I'm a Vindictive Sociopath and that she was a saint for dealing with me for so long.

My 40F husband 47M and I have been married less than a year. We are from different states and we met each other in a third state and married there.
My husband got fired from his previous job and we decided to immediately hurry and move to my home state 1,500 miles away. We are both looking for work and my dad 64M decided to give him work in the meantime. I honestly don’t know if my feelings are justified but I’m embarrassed that my husband didn’t knuckle down and get something else. It feels like my dad is having to “spoon feed” him work to get him to do anything. I have a good job in healthcare but I’m going through the steps to reinstate my license in my home state. I’m trying to get other work in the meantime, which could be Walmart or Taco Bell even, just something to get SOME money flowing until I get my license back.
The work my dad gave my husband is some painting work on a carport at my dad’s house. Both my husband and I were there all day yesterday which is just over half an hour from where we’re currently living. The vast majority of that time I visited with a handful of family members.
I have things I need to do in and near the house we’re living in. My husband wants me to come down with him to the job because he feels uncomfortable like it’s inappropriate for him to enter my dad’s house without me there. My dad wouldn’t have hired him if he didn’t want him in the house. My husband is always coming up with reasons to be worried about something. For example, he puts tape over the cameras on his phone in case of hackers. He also has us put our phones far away when he wants to tell me sensitive information because somebody could have hacked our phones and be listening to our conversations. Then he made this comment about wanting this job he’s doing for my dad to be a “team effort.” Why does HIS job need to be a team effort?! What does that even mean?! Especially when MY jobs are never a team effort involving him?!?!
My biggest concern is there’s been this pattern of cherry picking the parts of a traditional marriage that benefit him plus cherry picking the benefits of a modern marriage that benefit him, while I get the bad side of both worlds. He wants to have all this big authority and tell me to shut up while I earn most of the money.
I guess I should grow a pair and tell him to drive his car down there with his gas money and refuse to let him be a ball and chain.
Is there any merit whatsoever to him worrying about walking into my dad’s house to get cold drinks and use the restroom while I’m not there just because we’re sort of newlyweds?

TLDR: My sister who I have supported ever since she came out as trans and before that as non-binary came to my house, with only two weeks to prepare for two extra people. She came to my house with her dog she barely controlled. Was inconsiderate of the small space of our house and made it impossible for movement without her dog attacking mine and my partners ankles. She left trash and dishes in the area she was taking up. And made rude comments about my insecurities to one of my partners behind my back.
For some backstory
I (30F) have always loved all of my siblings. I'm my Father's 4th child and my Mother's 2nd child. My Dad has three children from a previous marriage before my Mom. My Mother had a child when she was 17 and gave my older brother who I know nothing about, up for adoption. Also (important later) each pregnancy my Mother went through she had gained a lot of weight. She also gained a lot of weight while trying to be on birth control. Pregnancy, birth control and hormones did nothing for body images for the women of my Mom's side of the family.
When I was six and my Mom was pregnant with my youngest sister (23F) We will call her E. My Mom and Dad got a divorce. For the first few years E, myself and J (28 F trans sister.) were all on good terms. That is until one summer when my Dad was visiting us. E, J, and I were all swimming and having child play competitions. I won the swimming race followed closely by J. I turned around to see E floating as if lifeless. I recognized the danger and swam out to get her and get her out of the water. E was only 3 years old at the time. She has nearly drowned to death, but my quick actions and thinking saved her life. We immediately called My Mom to tell her what happened and she cut the visit with my Dad short to take E to the hospital to make sure there was no further damage. Since then. My Mom became really protective of E and instead of praising my efforts I'm saving my baby sister, she tore me down for not being more vigilant since my Dad was so irresponsible.
Now mind you my Dad was in the area where E was drowning but was further away than I was to react. And when he reached us he helped pull E out of the water. This is when my Mom started to start degrading our Dad to our faces. She spoke I'll of our Dad constantly and be J was once male and looked a lot like our Dad. J had once shared the name of our Dad letter by letter. our Mom would compare her to our Dad in the most nastiest of ways and tell her that she would never amount to anything in her life. And when I started yelling at my Mom for the nasty way she was treating J. J started her transition at a early age. It was small at first when she came out and told the entirety of Moms side of the family that she wanted her name to be different than what it was and because it was what My Mom wanted originally, J was no longer the target of much of our Mom's wrath. So E and J started to grow closer together because they were more accepted by our Mother than I was.
See in my My Mom's and her parents eyes, I was a problem child. And I needed to behave set and set an example to my younger two siblings. She wanted me to cut contact with my Dad and anyone related to him, but I love my Dad and his side of the family more than anyone on my Mom's side. So I remained in constant contact with them. This angered my Mom. And she started to physically, mentally, emotionally abuse me. This led J and E to believe I was a bad person and when their birthday came up. And I say birthday, because J and E were born on the same exact day, just 5 years apart. Anyway they would gang up on me to make me feel bad about myself. Due to this behavior not only from my two younger siblings and Mom, but my Mom's side of the family, I began struggling mentally and emotionally for a very, very long time. Struggling with self image issues, people pleasing and misguided actions to try and please everyone around me. I never felt good enough. And I started to dress in ways that would get attention on me. To try to be seen and heard. Only to be told that as a 14 year old virgin that I looked like I was 6 months pregnant, because of how my belly developed when I hit puberty. After that I struggled to eat. And when I did eat it wasn't very much. However, when I didn't do what my Mother wanted me to do she would find news ways to punish me one of them was not allowing me to eat for 3 days straight. And the only reason that stopped was because my Dad's side of the family knew of my struggles and when I ate 3 plates of food they knew something was seriously wrong and asked me about it. And they threatened to remove me from the home if it ever happened again. Things got worse from there. I'm not going to go into anymore detail.
Skip forward to when I was 18. I started dating a highschool sweetheart of mine again. We had broken up in highschool because he had insulted one of best friends at that time. Only for her to burn bridges with me later down the road. Anyway after I had turned 19 he proposed to me. And we got married the day before I turned 20. So this was 10 years ago. Well when I married him I wasn't aware of the horrors that I gotten myself into. To not go into detail. He was extremely abusive and caused me to lose my daughter four days after Christmas day of 2015. When the doctors removed my daughter from my womb (six months along at this time.) She had a different complexion of skin than myself and my husband. She was much darker than either of us. And that is when I realized that during some naughty scenes that I thought was my husband trying to bring spice to the relationship, was actually h selling me for profit. Then what the doctors told me next pulled me out of my Epiphany of what I just realized, and caused me to spiral into the deepest depression I had ever been in. They told me that the abuse my Ex put me through caused my daughters face to cave in. After that I left my Ex husband and divorced him.
After 7 years of a shitty and abusive life after the horrible still birth of my daughter. Filled with 14 miscarriages. I have decided to get a change of scenery and moved states. Shortly after I did. I met my now Wifey (34F) and my Hubby (37M). For context. Hubby and Wifey are already married to each other. And six months prior to meeting me, Wifey had just lost her own baby through miscarriage due to medical malpractice. When I came into the state that I currently live in. I was immediately introduced to Hubby and Wifey. After the course of the month Hubby, Wifey and I all started to get to one another. And I liked them instantly. They had me on track to getting a new job, going to college, and encouraging me to be me without the fear of judgement. This made me feel safe and secure with them. Aomth after meeting them we all 3 decided to be in a relationship together. And before we had done anything remotely intimate, we ALL agreed out of respect for one another to all get checked for STD's. We all came out clean and we decided to start and intimate relationship. 6 months after being in the relationship. I find out that I am pregnant. And it was rough. Like really rough. My mornings sickness had me running to the toilet every ten minutes. Then I started to swell severely. Then I was diagnosed with gestational diabetes. Then I was showing multiple signs of preeclampsia. Unfortunately with me not being aware of the symptoms of preeclampsia I brushes of said symptoms as normal things that I would go through on a regular basis. This lead me to being so worn out I had to leave work half way through my shifts a lot. I went to work everyday that I was scheduled. Until the day that I went in for my final appointment with my OBGYN, before W (1 M) was born. All that day all I could think about was that my son had to get out and that something was wrong. The following day my son was born healthy and did not spend a single second in the NICU. And two days later after C-section I was ready to go home.
Then ended up having to go back to the hospital two days later, because I was having severe pain in my chest that would not go away. And got worse over the course of those two days. When we went back. I told them that I was just there for a C-section and that I was preeclamptic during my pregnancy and was having chest pain. They immediately took me back and began hooking my up to multiple monitors and started me on a bag of Magnesium Sulfate. Only for them to tell me that if I had ignored the pain and not come in that I would have most likely died within the next two days or so. After they saw that was no longer in need of magnesium they sent me home with a prescription to help manage my blood pressure.
Well now onto the Main story This past week was W's first birthday and several months ago we had planned for only my Dad to come up for the occasion and W is his first grandchild let alone Grandson of his that will know my Dad as Grandpa. Well less than a month ago. J, who has finally made her full transition to being female two years ago, ended up saying that she needed to leave state and had already made plans before this to move in with our Dad this summer. Well J ended up moving in with my Dad about a week before he was going to come to the state I am in for his Grandson's first birthday. And J wanted to come. So I said yes. Now to be clear I love my sister J with all my heart, but she's a pain in my ass at times. This time was no exception, but she crossed too many boundaries.
1 I told J that if she was bringing her dog to bring a kennel with her. She did not and did not tell my Dad or anyone that she did not bring a kennel. Due to her dog having SEVERE separation anxiety. I sighed and let it go.
2 My bigger dog is super protective of my home and my son. And due to this I did everything I could to keep her happy and calm and away from J and her dog to prevent any serious issues from happening.
3 I gave J the option to sleep on a mattress that Wifey was willing to give up for the time being. To sleep on it either in my son's room or the living room. Telling her that she would have to make room every morning for people to maneuver of she chose the living room. She chose the living room
With these three things set in place verbally. I expected her to follow the rules. Now you may be wondering where my Dad was. Well. See Wifey has her own space she calls her office, because it was where is was working from when she had a job. We have two memory foam mattresses that were there before I was and a regular spring mattress. We had finally put the spring mattress on a bed frame after sleeping on top of two full size mattress and the spring mattress. So we put the two extra mattresses in Wifey's office on top of the little couch that spread into a full size bed. I took one mattress for J and left the other in the office of Wifey. And that was where my Dad slept and Wifey left her office to my Dad for the 4 days they were here. Now my Dad is a kind loving person, but this visit he seemed stressed and did not look too well. Unlike last year. This was concerning to me, Wifey and Hubby.
While my Dad stayed in Wifey's office, J was out in the living room taking up all the space in it. She had brought her comfort items. Two really huge stuffed animals one being a unicorn and the other being a peep stuffy. While J was here she only moved the Mattress twice. Her dog was going up to my bigger dogs kennel and barking at my bigger dog cause my bigger dog to get aggravated. I told J to get her dog under control. J did not and the behavior of J's dog continued. J also constantly left trash lying around and refused to use the same bowl twice that we provided for her dog and brought out the small glass one, even though there bowls already provided. We have water bottles that we told J and my Dad that were W's emergency water supply as our Landlord has a habit of turning off water at random to work on the aquifer as we run on well water. J drank the water bottles that were meant for W's emergency supply.
While J was holding her Nephew for the first time J's dog was trying bite my son. And J set my son aside and attended to his dog and my son nearly fell from the couch, but thankfully I was right there and prevented that from happening.
While J was here she ignored that her dog was biting at our ankles and I told J and her dog that if her dog did it one more time I was going to smack it for attacking. J rolled her eyes and if it weren't a big deal for the way her dog was behaving. So the next time J's dog bit me. I barely even tapped it and the dog went ballistic as if I was killing the damn thing and J did nothing.
J also left our front door open multiple times and I told her that if she didn't start closing the door and we lost one of our cats due to it I was going to be pissed. As we have lost a cat due to people going 75 MPH down the 35 MPH road just outside our front door. J did not listen and thankfully our cats remained hidden in the house away from the devil dog that belongs to my sister.
Now I have been working on a lot of issues that held me back from keeping a clean home. And I have made a lot of progress. When J was here all that progress was thrown out the window as I see J doing the exact same things I was working to correct. She did not ever pick up any mess her dog made unless I specifically told J to do it. And then yell at her to do it an hour later. And then she immediately did it.
Now I have always been supportive of my sister J since she came out as non binary before she came out as trans and continued to support her. I had given her skirts, taught how to shave. So while she staying here. I gave her a dress that I knew would look good on her and meant a lot to me. And I taught her how to do her makeup on her.
Then yesterday, the day after my sister J and Dad left. Hubby had told me about something that was being said about me. J had told Hubby that I had gained a lot of weight since moving states and that I was turning to my Mom. And that my Mom had over ate due to her emotions. Which I know did not count for much of her weight gain. Basically insuating that I did not gain my weight due to pregnancy.
This whole experience was so infuriating. And I want to support my sister, so I contacted my older sibling and them what I should do. Only to learn that my Older Sibling cut ties with J, because of how badly J was shit talking me.
For some context
1 I have absolutely done everything I could to help support J in her transition. From clothes to makeup to shoes.
2 I have gone out of my way to defend J from anyone including our Mother from the negative and hurtful things that were being said about J being Trans.
3 I went out of my to do my best to accommodate J when she was here for only a few days.
4 I gave her a dress that meant a lot to me, because it was beautiful on her.
All of this to have get after her for not obeying the ground rules of our house, to disregard any mess her damn dog left. For her to leave the door wide open for more than a few seconds. And for her to allow her dog to try and attack my Son only for J to set my son aside and tend to her dog and leave my son in danger. After she knew all the struggles I went through to finally carry a healthy child.
So would I be the A hole to refuse my Trans sister entry intoy home ever again?

First of all, I've been with my boyfriend since I was a teenager, and I feel like I have a lot of built-up issues that I can't seem to get over, even after talking about them. Despite these issues, I love him and want our relationship to work out.
Some examples of these stresses are that I’ve had to handle many responsibilities for him, like applying for his jobs because he claims he doesn’t know how, and he’s lost all of them. He never takes me on dates, and if we do go out, I’m always the one who plans everything. He spends all his time on his hobbies, and I’m feeling fed up
Although there are these issues, I would be happy to work on them but they just add to me feeling this way. I don't know if I'm an asshole for feeling this way but he’s been dealing with anxiety and due to this has cancelled coming to our vacation I’ve been planning for months with 3 days notice. I feel guilty about being mad about him canceling the vacation because I know what it’s like to go through anxiety. But I can’t help feeling like he could push through it because it’s not like he’s dying, and he knows how much going on this trip means to me. AITA for being upset and considering breaking up over this?

Hey fellow redditors,
I just finished taking "The Complete Guide to Google Gemini" by Colt Steele on Udemy, and I can't recommend it enough! This course is perfect for anyone looking to dive deep into Google's Gemini platform. Colt Steele does an incredible job of breaking down complex concepts into easy-to-understand lessons, making it suitable for both beginners and those with some experience.
What I loved about this course: - Comprehensive Content: Covers everything from the basics to advanced features. - Hands-On Projects: Practical examples and projects to reinforce learning. - Engaging Instructor: Colt's teaching style is clear, concise, and engaging.
If you're looking to master Google Gemini, this course is definitely worth your time. Check it out and happy learning!
Cheers!

The original story of the death of RFK is shrouded with cover-up, lies, and corruption. This is a collection of evidence I’ve gathered that proves beyond a reasonable doubt a conspiracy to kill Robert F. Kennedy.
The bullet that killed RFK was fired from his right backside at an upward angle, and no witness in the vicinity said Sirhan was closer than 3-4 feet, with most saying around 6 feet. The way Kennedy was standing, facing Sirhan, makes it impossible for Sirhan to have shot him in that manner. witnesses stated the gunfire sounded like a machine gun, and said they had a hard time believing it was from one gun. The medical evidence, meticulously documented by Dr. Thomas Noguchi, the coroner who conducted the autopsy, showed that the fatal shots came from behind and 1 inch away, this automatically shows that Sirhan couldn’t have shot Robert Kennedy, but this is only the first thing. Dr. Noguchi, wrote a book on it calling it the perfect autopsy because it was. He was supervised by lots of different professional experts in autopsies. He saw what happened to JFK's body by the government and media, They didn't allow him to testify in the trial and then they ran a smear campaign against him for saying the bullets came from back right and upwards. He was then fired from his job.
Sirhan fired two bullets, one hitting a man and another hitting a frame behind RFK. He was then abruptly subdued and fired six more shots, which are all accounted for, hitting five different people, with two shots lodging in the ceiling panel and one in the frame. That gives us eight shots not accounting for the four that hit RFK. How is this possible with an eight-shot revolver? It's not. Audio recordings of the shooting have been examined by multiple experts, who concluded that 10-12 shots were fired.
The LAPD tampered with evidence; they removed the frame that clearly had a bullet, as well as the ceiling panels that were hit. This is supported by witness testimony and photographic evidence. The LAPD later stated that the evidence was taking up too much space—a flimsy excuse to blatantly cover up and hide the facts. Former FBI agent William Bailey supported the evidence of bullet holes in the doorways, remembering two bullets in the doorframe and FBI photos proving this. In addition, 20 FBI officers reported seeing bullet fragments or bullet holes in the doorframe.
Sirhan was not given a fair trial. His mother recalls Sirhan asking the judge for a new lawyer and being told to sit down or he would be tied down. His lawyer decided to fight on the basis that Sirhan was mentally ill and in a hypnotic trance, and did not even try to dispute the evidence. For example, the gun that was allegedly used in the shooting was examined by a ballistics expert who stated it was the same gun that killed RFK, even though the serial numbers of the gun he tested and Sirhan's gun didn't match up. Not only did this prove the expert was willing to lie, also destroys the credibility of the LAPD investigation. There was also no chain of custody, which in a real trial would be inadmissible.
They bullied and intimidated a witness Sandra Serrano who claimed a woman in a polka dot dress and a man ran out on the stairs saying, "We killed him, we killed him." They bullied her on tape, making her change her story. Many other people recall seeing and talking to this polka-dot dress girl. Also, a police officer named Paul Shrager got told by a witness that the Polka-dot lady ran past with a man them saying we killed him, Paul later saw in a news report they changed what he said to They killed him. The LAPD claimed they found the polka-dot lady, but it was another person in a green dress, blonde, with crutches, who looked nothing like the person described by witnesses. David Morales, who pressured Sandra Serrano into changing her story about the polka dot lady, was known to have administered tests in South America, Vietnam, and other countries, suggesting ties to the CIA. Morales, drunk, bragged to friends, "I was in Dallas when we got that motherfucker, and I was in Los Angeles when we got the little bastard." He had a history of involvement in CIA operations on foreign soil, including a test on Venezuelan dictator Pérez Jiménez during a government transition.
Scott Enyart was taking pictures in the pantry where Kennedy was killed. He says he loaded and clicked off his third roll of film. He claims that later, during the night of the shooting, police officers chased him down and confiscated his camera and film. He later tried to get this back 6 months later but the police denied ever knowing about it until he contacted his lawyer, who got him 26 out of 36 film. In the missing film was pictures during the shooting more interesting Scott was right behind Thane Eugene Caesar, showing these pictures would show there was no conspiracy, but no the LAPD destroyed them . This was a very weird thing to do. Later, Scott sued, and a Los Angeles jury awarded Enyart $465,000 in his claim against the city. The jury believed that Enyart was in the pantry when Kennedy was shot and that he took three rolls of film. The city was found to be negligent in returning the photographs that the police had confiscated. The photographs have never been found. This is not the only two incidences in the LAPD destroyed 2,400 pieces of evidence as well as Scott Enyart photos 3 weeks before Sirhan's trial.
In addition, Sirhan used to hypnotize himself Sirhan received letters and payments from the Ancient Mystical Order of the Rose Cross. He was known to be the easiest type of person to hypnotize. He be hypnotized to climb the bars of his cell During the trial, psychiatrist Bernard Diamond hypnotized Sirhan, told him he was a monkey, and Sirhan started swinging from the bars of his jail cell and acting like a monkey. Bernard Diamond was a very shady UCLA professor who many believe was one of the main MKULTRA hypnotizers used by the govt. Under hypnosis, he wrote the same things found in his notepad at home: "RFK must die, die." suggesting he wrote in a trance these writings are eerily similar to what he wrote while under hypnosis. William Bryan, a CIA MKULTRA primary researcher and an expert in hypnotism, claimed you could brainwash a person to do almost anything. He allegedly bragged about programming Sirhan and deprogramming Albert DeSalvo, "the Boston Strangler." Sirhan's diary also mentions mind control, aswell as Sirhan writing, "God help me, please help me, Salvo di DeSalvo." Could this be a link between a known CIA hypnotist and Sirhan.
Sirhan was led to a dark place by a woman after drinking coffee with her. He last remembers feeling drowsy and disoriented. He found himself lying on a table, and then he felt someone choking him. This strange and disjointed memory suggests that Sirhan may have been drugged or kidnapped before the Assassination.
Sirhan, easily manipulated through hypnotic techniques and possibly drugged, might have been an easy target for such a conspiracy. His behavior after the arrest was strange, as if he were in a trance. He was described by witnesses as having an empty look, almost as if he were devoid of emotion or awareness of his surroundings. This is consistent with reports of individuals under deep hypnosis.
So after all this, you may ask who did it? It was Eugene Thane Caesar and the polka-dot dress girl. This is the evidence: Thane Caesar was a last-minute replacement as Kennedy’s body guard couldn't show up that day. the kitchen was constantly unguarded, and a Kennedy staffer said she had to keep getting people out of the kitchen, the person to guard the kitchen door was Thane Eugene Caesar, this is where Sirhan would’ve come from and was seen standing there before the shooting. Eugene was standing in the exact position someone would have had to be in to fire the fatal shot. A man and a woman claimed to see a security guard fire shots at Sirhan, and a witness said this in an interview immediately after the shooting. RFK's last conscious action was ripping Eugene's tie off—why would he do that? It could be dismissed as accidental if, and it's a big if, there wasn't an incompetent investigation by the LAPD on a second shooter, or why they didn't take Eugene's gun that he had on the night and didn't interview him for a year.
In that interview, he said he had a .22 same used in the shooting, which he sold before the shooting. This was confirmed to be false as there is a receipt showing he sold it months after to another man. Why would he lie about this? The LAPD said there were no right-wingers there on the night of the killing but guess who was our good friend Eugene. He said in an interview he didn't like Kennedy and was a Republican. Just a bit weird. Eugene was leading RFK down this route as the other path was deemed too crowded or unsafe in a last minute change. To clarify, Eugene was not the only one holding on to Kennedy. Eugene was a very weird person who had a top-secret clearance at Lockheed but was working as a security guard just doesn't make sense.
Also the court granted Thane Caesars wish not to testify.
How do you know this polka-dot lady was involved? Two witnesses stated she was saying, "We killed him, killed him." She was also seen trying to buy a gun and ammo with Sirhan and another man, and there is proof of the sale. in total, she was seen by 10 different people at the Ambassador Hotel.
So why would Sirhan do this? MKULTRA. Sirhan Sirhan was working as a horse trainer or whatever. He never rode horses, but one day he did and he got concussed. He was recorded as going into a Naval hospital for 1 hour and discharged. Sirhan states that he was there for weeks. After the fall, everyone who knew Sirhan said he was different after that fall. Sirhan disappeared for 3 months before the assassination as well, his mother stated.
“On a foggy morning on Sept. 25, 1966, Sirhan fell from a mare named Hy-Vera. “Sirhan was thrown against a metal post, where he lay crumpled, crying and bleeding,” wrote James McKinley. Sirhan later received a $2,000 settlement over the incident.”
Declassified documents have revealed that the CIA was actively monitoring Robert F. Kennedy and had operatives present at the Ambassador Hotel on the night of his assassination. Investigative journalist Shane O'Sullivan's research highlighted the presence of three men identified as former CIA operatives at the hotel, raising questions about their role and purpose that night. These operatives, including George Joannides, David Morales, and Gordon Campbell, were all connected to various covert CIA activities.
Lieutenant Manuel Peña, a key figure in charge of the investigation, left the LAPD shortly before the assassination to work in South America for the Agency for International Development (USAID), a widely known CIA front. Shortly before the assassination, he came back to the LAPD and was given command of the Special Division Investigation Squad in charge of conspiracies.
The possible involvement of the CIA and other intelligence agencies cannot be dismissed. The chaotic political climate of the 1960s, marked by the assassinations of major political figures like JFK, MLK, and RFK, The CIA, known for its covert operations and psychological experiments, had the means and motive to conduct such an operation.
Eugene Thane Cesar's role remains suspicious. He was in the perfect position to fire the fatal shots, and his conflicting statements about his firearm ownership add to the suspicion. Cesar's background with top-secret clearance at Lockheed and his animosity towards Kennedy suggest a deeper involvement. His presence in the pantry and the physical evidence pointing to shots fired from his location make him a prime suspect.
The polka dot dress woman remains a mysterious figure. Witnesses consistently reported her presence and her suspicious behavior. Her alleged statements about "killing him" and attempts to purchase firearms with Sirhan indicate her involvement in the conspiracy. Despite the LAPD's efforts to discredit witnesses and dismiss their accounts, the consistency of their testimonies cannot be ignored.
The destruction and tampering of evidence by the LAPD and FBI further deepen the conspiracy. The removal of door frames, ceiling panels, and the disappearance of crucial photographs suggest an intentional cover-up. Scott Enyart's case exemplifies the mishandling of evidence. His missing photographs, which could have provided critical insights into the events in the pantry.
In 1992, a petition to the grand jury requested the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the LAPD, signed by many figures, with 800 pages of evidence showing the LAPD destroying and falsifying evidence. Notable signatories included RFK assassination researchers rights activists, and legal experts. The petition outlined numerous instances of evidence tampering, witness intimidation, and procedural irregularities surrounding the investigation into RFK's assassination. It argued that a special prosecutor was necessary to conduct an impartial and thorough investigation into the LAPD's handling of the case, given the gravity of the allegations and the implications for justice and accountability. Despite the compelling evidence presented in the petition, no special prosecutor was appointed.
The involvement of intelligence agencies, the manipulation of evidence, the intimidation of witnesses, and the use of hypnotic techniques on Sirhan paint a picture of a complex and deep conspiracy. The possibility of mind control, as seen in the MKULTRA experiments, aligns with Sirhan's behaviour and writings. The presence of a second shooter, likely Eugene Thane Cesar, and the mysterious polka dot dress woman, make me believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Sirhan did not Kill Robert F. Kennedy alone.
TL;DR In conclusion, the evidence suggests that the parts of CIA, the LAPD, Eugene Thane Cesar, and the polka dot dress lady were part of a conspiracy to assassinate Robert F. Kennedy. The deliberate destruction of evidence, the manipulation of Sirhan through hypnosis, and the suspicious activities of key figures involved in the case point to a coordinated effort to eliminate Kennedy. The official narrative does not hold up against the substantial evidence of a second shooter and the involvement of intelligence agencies. After looking at all this evidence, no person could conclude any differently.

I’m doing so good and yet I feel like I’m doing so bad.
I don’t have my own car yet. I still use state insurance. My job isn’t one I want to make a career out of. I have no solid relationship, everyone I am in a relationship with is either too far..or not on the same page as I am. Or our age gap is too wide. Or their intentions don’t align.
I have no motivation to do better because unless you’re a millionaire I feel like America just uses every cent you make. It’s a fine balance of using some of the government support but not all of it so I still have freedoms(for example, I could go on disability. But If I do then I can only make so much money)and I’m also still supported no matter what I do as long as I make enough money to live off and save it at the same time.
If I go in disability I’d be forced into scrapping the whole idea of saving money.
So I work. Even though jobs can fire you so easily for missing work. And I’m a reliable enough employee but I’ve also been almost sent to the hospital for mental health concerns. Yes my work loves me but they’d be stupidly quick to replace me if I’m gone.
My current job is gonna take a pause in a few weeks for the summer and I’m already enrolled in two programs. One is Charlie health and one is a job internship/lesson course for careers.
I know I’m all mangled and not making any sense. I’m just typing out thoughts and hoping someone relates to something.
Every time I think I’ve found something that’ll help it just falls through. It’s so frustrating.
Ughhh, I need to just go to sleep but my mind is just like a million thoughts a minute.

In the realm of United States Postal Service (USPS) employment, staying up-to-date with personal information is crucial for ensuring smooth administrative processes and effective communication. LiteBlue USPS, the online portal dedicated to USPS employees, offers a convenient platform for managing various aspects of employment, including updating personal information. In this comprehensive guide, we'll walk you through the steps to update your personal information on Liteblue USPS, why it's important, and how it contributes to a seamless employee experience.
Understanding LiteBlue USPS and Its Significance
Before diving into the specifics of updating personal information, let's first understand what LiteBlue USPS is and why it's significant for USPS employees. LiteBlue USPS is an online portal developed by the USPS to provide employees with access to a wide range of work-related services and information. From checking work schedules to accessing payroll information, exploring career development opportunities, and managing personal details, LiteBlue serves as a centralized platform for USPS employees to streamline various aspects of their job. Keeping personal information accurate and up-to-date on LiteBlue USPS is essential for ensuring that employees receive important communications, benefits, and services without interruptions or delays.
Steps to Update Your Personal Information on LiteBlue USPS
Updating your personal information on LiteBlue USPS is a straightforward process that can be completed in a few simple steps:
1. Log in to LiteBlue USPS
Begin by logging in to the LiteBlue USPS portal using your employee identification number (EIN) and password. Navigate to the "Personal Information" section of the portal, where you'll find options to update various aspects of your personal details.
2. Review Current Information
Before making any changes, take a moment to review your current personal information to ensure accuracy. This may include your name, address, contact information, emergency contacts, and other relevant details.
3. Make Necessary Updates
If you need to make changes to any of your personal information, select the appropriate option from the menu and follow the prompts to update the information accordingly. For example, if you've moved to a new address, you can input your new address details and save the changes.
4. Verify Changes
After making updates, take a moment to review the changes you've made to ensure accuracy and completeness. Double-check the spelling of your name, the accuracy of your address, and the validity of any contact information you've provided.
5. Save Changes
Once you're satisfied with the updates, save your changes to confirm them. LiteBlue USPS may prompt you to enter your password or provide additional verification to ensure the security of your personal information.
6. Confirm Updates
After saving your changes, LiteBlue USPS will confirm that your personal information has been updated successfully. Take note of any confirmation messages or reference numbers provided for your records.
7. Review Confirmation
Finally, review the confirmation of your updates to ensure that all changes have been processed correctly. If you encounter any issues or discrepancies, contact USPS HR or IT support for assistance.
Why Updating Personal Information Is Important
Keeping your personal information accurate and up-to-date on liteblue portal is essential for several reasons:
1. Ensures Effective Communication
Accurate contact information allows USPS to communicate important updates, announcements, and notifications to employees effectively. Whether it's changes to work schedules, benefits enrollment deadlines, or organizational updates, having correct contact details ensures that employees receive timely and relevant information.
2. Facilitates Administrative Processes
Updated personal information streamlines administrative processes within USPS, such as payroll processing, benefits administration, and emergency contact procedures. Having accurate information on file ensures that administrative tasks are completed efficiently and accurately, minimizing errors and delays.
3. Supports Compliance Requirements
Maintaining accurate personal information is essential for complying with USPS policies, regulations, and legal requirements. Whether it's tax reporting, benefits eligibility, or emergency contact protocols, having up-to-date information ensures compliance with relevant guidelines and regulations.
4. Enhances Security and Privacy
Keeping personal information current on LiteBlue USPS helps to enhance security and privacy by ensuring that only authorized individuals have access to sensitive employee data. By updating contact information and other personal details promptly, employees can reduce the risk of identity theft, fraud, and unauthorized access to their information.
Conclusion
Updating your personal information on LiteBlue USPS is a simple yet important task that contributes to a seamless employee experience and ensures the accuracy and integrity of employee records. By following the steps outlined in this guide, USPS employees can easily manage their personal information online, ensuring effective communication, streamlined administrative processes, compliance with regulations, and enhanced security and privacy. As technology continues to evolve, LiteBlue USPS remains a valuable tool for USPS employees to manage various aspects of their employment conveniently and efficiently.

This is my own head canon, and I would love to hear thoughts. It’s based on the theory that Harry was a horocrux. I think that the Dursley’s loved Harry and legitimately tried to do their best for Harry, but were unable to because he was a Horocrux. I think that what he did was turn the best qualities of those around him against themselves and living with him they would have had that effect upon them every day for years.
Consider Dumbledore. His ambition, his drive for knowledge, his desire to protect others cost him to put on the ring which ultimately cost him his life. Due to Snapes love of Lily upon meeting Harry he quiz the boy looking for pieces of himself and her felt anger into disappointment when he didn’t see any. Then he spent years tormenting Harry as a direct result. A person doesn’t become a teacher and stay a teacher for a decade if they don’t love what they are doing. And he humiliated a child for not knowing about their world. out of loyalty he killed Dumbledore which leaded directly to his own death. Again, we see the best qualities of Snape being used against himself. Those are some extreme examples, but what about Hermione. Her drive for knowledge caused her to stay up late many nights as well as neglect meals. It cost her to alienate herself from others as well as cost her her health to the point where she use the dangerous Time Turner artifact, literally risking her own sanity in the pursuit of knowledge. Would Lockhart had been willing to kill children if he hadn’t been around Harry for a year? I don’t know. Barry Crouch JR.’s loyalty to Voldemort made him completely unhinged and cost him to reveal himself again leading to his own defeat. The few examples are listed here are wizards. How much worse would this affect be on Muggles with no understanding or means of protection.
The Dursley’s would have felt this effect every day full force for a decade plus. They had no escape from it. Nowhere to hide from the time they got home until the time they left for work or school. Even their vacations and holidays were spent with Harry. I think they genuinely tried to do their best for him. I think they genuinely loved him and that was their undoing. We know that they tried to strangle the magic out of him, but why? His parents had just been killed because of it. As Petunia said, “ she was my sister.” I think they were trying to protect him from dangerous force that they couldn’t understand that he just taken part of their family from them. And because of being around Harry, their desire to protect her nephew, made them do it in the worst possible way. They even made lies such as going to a reformatory to keep him hidden.made him speak about how badly he was being punished while he was hidden from the outside world.
But this effect spilt over into other aspects of their life. They’re pride to having a wonderful family, cause them to look down on others. Cause them to search out reasons for why they were better than their neighbors. Natural inclination to give their son the best was magnified into the point where they spoiled and were over indulgent. How many times did we read uncle Vernon say words to the effect of precocious little tyke. His weight. His extra birthday gifts. These were a result of their love for their son being turned against them and against him.
Dudley’s strength Was a great asset and was made to cause him to become a bully. To hurt those around him. Over indulgent parents would make any child spoiled, but how much worse was it for him under the effect of the horocrux. His strength made him take joy in hurting others.
So who were the Dursley’s when he wasn’t there? This is what made me start thinking about this. There is me thing I keep going back to; one point of evidence: they took him back. In Chamber of Secrets he tore apart their house. They took him back. He blew up his aunt. They took him back. He ruined the biggest deal in Uncle Vernon’s life l. They took him back. Their son got a tail. They took him back. Their son was attacked by Dementors. They took him back. They didn’t just keep taking him back, they also kept trying to protect him. And in the end doing so cost them everything. They had to leave their home. Uncle Vernon had to quit his job which meant a lot to him. The lives were destroyed because of their love and desire to protect Harry.
I think that’s who the Durley really were. I think that they are some of the greatest heroes in the books who did everything they could to protect their nephew against the force that they were powerless against for decades while underneath the never ending assault of a horocrux.
Thank you for reading and I’m sure I’m going to be told many times in the comments how wrong I am.

Found this article after doing a quick deep-dive after this post from u/evilez:
https://www.reddit.com/UFOs/comments/1d33m4l/does_anybody_remember_what_podcast_this_was/
"Hello fine ladies and gentlemen! I remember listening to a podcast less than a year ago. The main subject of the podcast was UFOs (I think)... anyways the guest told a story that a congressman or senator wrote a bill that was against the CIA or going to defund the CIA, in the 80's... and shortly thereafter, someone broke into his home, dragged his wife out into the street and stuck a gun in her mouth and told her to kill the bill."
Some light Googling brought up this article about the history of the CIA, the OSS, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan's attempts at defunding the agency in the 90s.
Here's an article about that attempt brought by Moynihan published on the Carnegie Endowment Website on December 20, 2005.
https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/2005/12/the-case-for-abolishing-the-cia?lang=en
Here's the New Yorker piece about all of this from October 3rd, 2022.

Spooked -- What’s wrong with the C.I.A.? -- By Amy Davidson Sorkin -- October 3, 2022

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/10/10/has-the-cia-done-more-harm-than-good
According to the article regarding the resuscitation of the OSS as the CIA immediately following Roswell and the Twining Memo:
"Many of its officers moved straight to the new C.I.A. Most consequentially, perhaps, four future directors of the C.I.A. were O.S.S. veterans: Allen Dulles, Richard Helms, William Colby, and William Casey."
Here's the New Yorker article in full:
"On January 4, 1995, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, of New York, introduced a bill called the Abolition of the Central Intelligence Agency Act. It had been a rough stretch for the C.I.A. The year before, Aldrich Ames, a longtime officer, had been convicted of being a longtime mole for Soviet (and then Russian) intelligence. Despite having a reputation among his colleagues as a problem drinker who appeared to live far beyond his means, Ames had been given high-level assignments with access to the names of American sources in the U.S.S.R. When the F.B.I. finally arrested him, he was in the Jaguar he used for commuting to work at Langley; by then, he was responsible for the death of at least ten agents. Moynihan said that the case was such a flamboyant display of incompetence that it might actually be a distraction from “the most fundamental defects of the C.I.A.” He meant that the agency—in what he considered to be its “defining failure”—had both missed the fact that the Soviet Union was on the verge of collapse and done little to hasten its end.
He gave a diagnosis for what had gone wrong. “Secrecy keeps mistakes secret,” he said. “Secrecy is a disease. It causes a hardening of the arteries of the mind.” He quoted John le Carré on that point, adding that the best information actually came from the likes of area specialists, diplomats, historians, and journalists. If the C.I.A. was disbanded, he said, the State Department could pick up the intelligence work, and do a better job.
Moynihan was, in some respects, being disingenuous. As he well knew, even if his bill had passed, spies and spying wouldn’t have gone away. The State Department already had its own mini agency, the Bureau of Intelligence and Research. The Departments of Energy and Treasury each had one, too. The Defense Intelligence Agency conducted clandestine operations; U.S. Army Intelligence, Air Force Intelligence, and the Office of Naval Intelligence kept themselves busy as well. The National Security Agency was nearly two decades away from the revelation, by Edward Snowden, a contractor and a former C.I.A. employee, that it had collected information about the phone calls of most Americans, but it was a behemoth even in Moynihan’s time. So was the Federal Bureau of Investigation. There were about a dozen agencies then; now, after reforms that were supposed to streamline things, there are eighteen, including the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (O.D.N.I.), a sort of meta-C.I.A. that has a couple of thousand employees, and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis. The Drug Enforcement Administration (which currently has foreign offices in sixty-nine countries) has an Office of National Security Intelligence. Four million people in the United States now have security clearances.
It can be hard to sort out which agencies do what; players in the espionage business aren’t always good with boundaries. Both the C.I.A. and the N.S.A. make use of satellite resources, including commercial ones, but there is a separate agency in charge of a spy-satellite fleet, the National Reconnaissance Office—not to be confused with the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which deals with both space-based and ground-level imaging, or with Space Delta 18, the nation’s newest intelligence agency, which is attached to the Space Force. Abolishing the C.I.A. might do nothing more than reconfigure the turf wars.
[NOTE: both Sean Kirkpatrick and David Grusch worked for the NRO and at least Grusch worked for the NGA]
As the senator from New York also knew, a large proportion of the C.I.A.’s resources are devoted not to intelligence gathering but to covert operations, some of which look like military operations. In “Spies, Lies, and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence” (Princeton)—one of several recent books that coincide with the seventy-fifth anniversary of the agency’s founding—Amy B. Zegart, a political scientist at Stanford, writes that it’s “getting harder to know just where the CIA’s role ends and the military’s role begins.” Yet the agency’s paramilitary pursuits and related covert activities go back decades. They include the botched Bay of Pigs landing, the brutal Phoenix Program in Vietnam, and a long list of assassination attempts, coup plots, the mining of a harbor (with explosive devices the agency built itself), and drone strikes. These operations have very seldom ended well.
Moynihan’s bill had no more luck than another that he introduced the same day, aimed at ending Major League Baseball’s exemption from antitrust laws. In each case, people understood that there was a problem, but both institutions were protected by the sense that there was something essential, and perhaps authentically American, about them, including their very brokenness. A sudden turn of events can convince even the C.I.A.’s most sober critics that the agency will save us all, whether from terrorists or from Donald Trump. But, seventy-five years in, it’s far from clear whether the C.I.A. is good at its job, or what that job is or should be, or how we could get rid of the agency if we wanted to.
How did we end up with the C.I.A.? A familiar explanation is that the shock of Pearl Harbor made the United States realize it needed more spies; the Office of Strategic Services was formed and jumped into action; and, when the war ended, the O.S.S. evolved seamlessly into the C.I.A., ready to go out and win the Cold War. But that narrative isn’t quite right, particularly regarding the relationship between the O.S.S. and the C.I.A.
[NOTE: We know how ended up with the CIA. ROSWELL.]
The United States has always used spies of some sort. George Washington had a discretionary espionage budget for which he didn’t have to turn in receipts. In the early part of the twentieth century, the State Department had an intelligence-analysis unit, along with a cryptography group called the Black Chamber, which operated out of a brownstone in New York’s Murray Hill until it was shut down, in 1929. The Army and the Navy had cryptography and reconnaissance units, too. When the Second World War began, their operations ramped up dramatically, and, as Nicholas Reynolds recounts in “Need to Know: World War II and the Rise of American Intelligence” (Mariner), these units, not the O.S.S., handled most of the code-breaking. The problem became the volume of raw intelligence. The task of making sense of it and of turning it into something that policymakers could use went to an office within the Army’s military-intelligence division (or G-2), which, Reynolds says, produced “the country’s best strategic intelligence” during the war. That office’s work was directed by Alfred McCormack, a former clerk for Supreme Court Justice Harlan Stone and a partner at Cravath, Swaine & Moore. Many of the people he brought in were young corporate lawyers; the theory was that their training in plowing through mountains of documents made them ideal intelligence analysts.
William J. Donovan, who led and largely conceived of the O.S.S., was also a Wall Street lawyer, but one with an aversion to the “legalistic.” What Donovan envisioned was essentially an array of commando units that would operate stealthily and behind enemy lines. In practice, what he tried to build, according to a colleague, was a “private army.” His escapades often risked too much and gained too little. In late 1943, one of his own officers wrote to him that “the set-up has been incredibly wasteful in manpower and, except for a few spotty accomplishments, has been a national failure.” And it had produced “chaos in the field.” Donovan’s nickname was Wild Bill, but his staff called him Seabiscuit, after the thoroughbred, because of his tendency to race around, engaging in what was basically war tourism. In the end, though, the O.S.S. made real contributions, including through its contacts with the French Resistance. But Donovan’s complaint about D Day was that there was “too much planning.” Counterintelligence and strategic thinking bored him, and the O.S.S.’s analysis division was seen as secondary to its operations.
When Harry Truman became President, in April, 1945, he took a look at the O.S.S. and, in September, 1945, abolished it. About two years later, he signed the National Security Act, which established the C.I.A. (and the Department of Defense), but he didn’t want the new agency to be like the group Donovan had run. Instead, it was supposed to do what its name suggested: centralize the intelligence that various agencies gathered, analyze it, and turn it into something the President could use.
[NOTE: I tried doing some research after reading something yesterday about how the NSA was developed in 1952 under Project Sigma to try and decode "alien" communications. If anyone can offer anything, you'd be helping humanity.]
“It was not intended as a ‘Cloak and Dagger’ Outfit!,” Truman later wrote. He also had to deal with public apprehensions that he might create what a Chicago Tribune headline called a “Super Gestapo Agency”—which is why, in its charter, the C.I.A. was banned from domestic spying.
Reynolds’s book is the best of the recent batch, and the most readable. It does not retrofit the history of the O.S.S. around the assumption that the C.I.A. was the inevitable lead postwar intelligence agency. There were other contenders, including a version of McCormack’s office in the State Department—something like what Moynihan wanted. J. Edgar Hoover argued that “World Wide Intelligence” should be turned over to the F.B.I., with military intelligence subservient to him. In some alternative history, he might have pulled that off; by 1943, he was running undercover operations in twenty Latin American countries. And so things could have been worse.
[WHAT UNDERCOVER OPERATIONS WERE WE RUNNING IN LATIN AMERICANS COUNTRIES IN 1943.]
Donovan was an adept publicist, but what mattered most, in the end, was that he was good, or lucky, when it came to hiring people. Despite the “pale, male, and Yale” stereotype, the O.S.S. was somewhat more diverse than other units, and certainly more eclectic. Among its ranks were Ralph Bunche, Herbert Marcuse, and Julia Child. Many of its officers moved straight to the new C.I.A. Most consequentially, perhaps, four future directors of the C.I.A. were O.S.S. veterans: Allen Dulles, Richard Helms, William Colby, and William Casey. Each seems to have had glory-day memories of the O.S.S., which is to say that each, in various ways, was afflicted with what a general in Army intelligence called “the screwball Donovan effect.” Casey, who put a picture of Donovan on his wall, said of his old boss, “We all glowed in his presence.” Wild Bill lost the bureaucratic fight but won the personnel and mythology wars.
And, of course, the agency found customers and collaborators in the White House. There was no mention of covert action in the law that chartered the C.I.A., but Presidents—starting with Truman—began using it that way. One of the agency’s first operations involved meddling in the 1948 Italian election, to insure the victory of the Christian Democrats. The subsidies and outright bribery of Italian politicians, some of them on the far, far right, continued into the nineteen-seventies.
Almost from its creation, though, there was a sense that something about the C.I.A. was off. The split between covert action and intelligence gathering and analysis was part of it. The director of the agency was also supposed to be the leader of U.S. intelligence as a whole, but, invariably, the person in the job seemed more invested in preëminence than in coördination. That setup remained in place until the establishment of the O.D.N.I., in 2004, a move that thus far has mostly continued a tradition of trying to deal with the C.I.A.’s dysfunction by setting up ever more agencies, offices, and centers. (The N.S.A. was established, in 1952, in response to a series of cryptography-related failures.) “Legacy of Ashes,” Tim Weiner’s 2008 history of the C.I.A.—and still an invaluable overview—takes its title from a lament by Eisenhower about what he’d be leaving his successors if the “faulty” structure of American intelligence wasn’t changed. Since Weiner’s book was published, the ashes, and the agencies, have only been piling up.
Zegart’s “Spies, Lies, and Algorithms” aims to bring that history to the present. Zegart has served as an adviser to intelligence agencies, and she provides a decent guide to our current bureaucracy. Throughout, her book is clear and well organized—maybe a little too well organized, one feels, after taking in the “Seven Deadly Biases” of intelligence analysis, the “Four Main Adversaries” and the “Five Types of Attack” in the crypto area, and the “Three Words, Four Types” that define covert action. (The covert-action words, incidentally, are “influence,” “acknowledged,” and “abroad.”) Not a few paragraphs read like PowerPoint charts; contradictions are displayed without really being reckoned with. She observes that the balance between “hunting” and “gathering” seems off, but, in her telling, the fact that Presidents of both parties regularly turn to the C.I.A. for paramilitary and other covert tasks constitutes proof that doing so is part of the order of things. The impression she leaves is that if it all goes wrong, it’s because some checklist has been missed. One of the top priorities of U.S. intelligence today, she thinks, should be persuading tech companies to get with the program and help out. She moots the creation of yet another agency, to deal with OSINT—open-source intelligence.
In one chapter, Zegart provides a list of scandals involving spying within the U.S. by various intelligence agencies—notably the N.S.A., the F.B.I., and the C.I.A. “All of these activities violated American law,” she writes. “But that’s the point: domestic laws forbid this kind of surveillance of Americans.” How is that the point, exactly? She depicts the Senate’s 2014 Torture Report, which detailed profound abuses in the C.I.A.’s so-called black sites, as a they-said, the-agency-said, who-knows case. She turns it into a parable about the problems with Congress—suggesting that, although the committee structure may have needed rejiggering, the moral compass of those involved in the program of torture was just fine.
Another new volume, “A Question of Standing: A History of the CIA” (Oxford), by Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, a professor emeritus of history at the University of Edinburgh, offers the insights of a more distant observer. He can be astute about how “false memories” of the O.S.S.’s accomplishments have led the C.I.A. astray. Part of his argument is that the agency has acted as if its influence depended on its standing with whoever is in the White House, thus motivating it to offer Presidents quick fixes that fix nothing. The net effect is to reduce its standing, and that of the U.S., with the public at home and abroad. But Jeffreys-Jones is prone to rash generalizations and pronouncements. He theorizes that, in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, George W. Bush’s national-security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, may have been susceptible to “war mongering” due to her status as “a descendant of slaves,” and that the working-class background of the C.I.A.’s director, George Tenet, made him more likely to vouch for the faulty intelligence on weapons of mass destruction used to justify the war. “Social mobility so often leads to conformity,” warns Jeffreys-Jones, himself the son of an academic historian.
During the Vietnam War, the C.I.A. had discouraging intelligence to offer, and, when successive Administrations didn’t want to hear it, focussed on being helpful by providing those supposedly quick fixes. That meant abetting a coup in 1963, spying on antiwar protesters, and launching the Phoenix Program, an anti-Vietcong campaign marked by torture and by arbitrary executions; in total, more than twenty thousand people were killed under Phoenix’s auspices.
Phoenix was run by William Colby, the O.S.S. alum, who was soon promoted to C.I.A. director. At lower levels, discontent about Vietnam fueled leaks. In December, 1974, the journalist Seymour Hersh told the agency that he was about to publish a story in the Times exposing its domestic spying. Whether in a miscalculation or (as Jeffreys-Jones somewhat breathlessly speculates) as an act of personal expiation, Colby gave Hersh partial confirmation. Amid the scandals and the Congressional hearings that followed, Colby angered some of his colleagues, and Henry Kissinger, by laying bare even more. It emerged that, in 1973, Colby’s predecessor had asked senior agency officials to produce a list of things the C.I.A. had done that might have been unlawful. The resulting document, covering just the prior fifteen years, was known in-house as “The Family Jewels,” and was almost seven hundred pages long.
The question of how much it matters who works at the C.I.A. is a perennial one. The influence of Donovan’s acolytes shows that decisions about whom you recruit can, in a formative period or at a critical juncture, make a big difference. But, once an institutional culture has become entrenched, it can be easier to see how the institution shapes the people within it than vice versa.
“Wise Gals: The Spies Who Built the CIA and Changed the Future of Espionage” (Putnam), by Nathalia Holt, comes at the question from a different angle. It’s about five women who worked for the early C.I.A.; three also worked at the O.S.S., and one, Eloise Page, began her career as Bill Donovan’s secretary. Holt is also the author of “Rise of the Rocket Girls,” about women in the early years of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and “The Queens of Animation,” about women at the Walt Disney Company. Her book contains fine material for a beautifully art-directed streaming series, with set pieces in postwar Paris, nineteen-fifties Baghdad, and nineteen-seventies Greece, where Page was the C.I.A.’s first woman station chief. It even has a framing device in the form of the “Petticoat Panel,” a working group of C.I.A. women that convened in 1953 to document their unequal pay and treatment. Holt quotes the transcript of the meeting at which the leadership of the agency summarily rejected their findings. Helms, the future director, says, “It is just nonsense for these gals to come on here and think that the government is going to fall apart because their brains aren’t going to be used to the maximum.” (In 1977, Helms was convicted of lying to Congress about the C.I.A.’s machinations in Chile.) What the book is not, unfortunately, is a coherent history of the C.I.A., of the era it depicts, or even of these women’s work.
Holt’s research does turn up evidence that Jane Burrell, one of her subjects, was the first C.I.A. officer to die in the line of duty, in a plane crash in France, in 1948, a fact that the agency itself apparently missed. Holt ends her book with a call for a star honoring Burrell to be added to the C.I.A.’s memorial wall. Of the hundred and thirty-seven officers represented there, she writes, forty-five died accidentally, the majority in plane crashes, meaning that Burrell’s case would be fairly typical. Burrell was on the return leg of a trip to Brussels, where she’d been sent to talk to war-crimes investigators about a mess the C.I.A. had created by relying on an agent who turned out to have worked with the S.S. and was now in custody. In that respect, too, Burrell, who had personally handled the agent, was typical of the C.I.A. (After Burrell vouched for him, the man was released.) The subject of the C.I.A.’s postwar relations with former Nazis—some of whom, like Reinhard Gehlen, it helped to install in West Germany’s new intelligence service—and with collaborationist émigré groups is, no doubt, a morass. Holt, alas, manages to make the story even more garbled than it has to be. In the end, she basically treats the whole sordid episode as a learning experience for the Gals.
The problem is that the agency doesn’t seem to learn much. Holt credits Mary Hutchison with helping to build a network of émigré Ukrainian nationalists. Beginning in 1949, the agency parachuted some of them (including one whom Hutchison apparently distrusted) behind the Soviet border, where they were quickly captured—and repeated the same procedure for a number of years. “Despite the catastrophe, the Ukraine operation would serve as a template moving forward,” Holt writes. “The C.I.A. had more success with back-to-back operations in Iran and Guatemala, where covert action was able to deftly oust leaders considered undesirable.” It’s odd to describe these coups as deft. One of Zegart’s handy lists is of the “unintended consequences” in Iran: “religious extremism, a revolutionary overthrow, the American hostage crisis, severed ties, regional instability, and today’s rising nuclear dangers.” Guatemala is still dealing with the violent legacy of the coup that the C.I.A. visited upon it. Then there’s the question of the intended consequences, which were, respectively, to elevate a shah and a military regime. Secret wars tend not to be so secret in the country where they take place.
It was, no doubt, frustrating for Hutchison when, a few years later, her colleagues on the Bay of Pigs task force failed to make use of her Spanish-language skills. But are we supposed to think that the whole misconceived enterprise would have gone off without a hitch were it not for the C.I.A.’s misogyny? One of Holt’s minor themes is that women in the C.I.A. were seen as more natural analysts than operatives—with analysis, in turn, seen as less manly, and less valuable, to everybody’s detriment. But she is more intent on showing that these women were also daring. The main point of “Wise Gals” is that it’s cool that women were in the early C.I.A., and therefore that the C.I.A. itself was cooler than we’d realized. Holt celebrates a big promotion Page got that afforded her access to the secret of a safe containing shellfish-derived poison. You don’t have to be pale, male, and Yale to be complicit in a bungled assassination plot, or, for that matter, a program of rendition and torture.
Why do so many books about the C.I.A. have trouble getting their story straight? It can’t just be the secrecy of the work itself, at least with regard to the earlier years, about which much has been declassified. (Much remains under wraps: Moynihan complained that classification created more than six million supposed secrets in 1993; Zegart writes that the number in 2016 was fifty-five million—not all of which can possibly have been critical.) The aura of secrecy, by contrast, probably does distort the judgment of its chroniclers. And the scope of the agency’s work is a challenge: it’s hard to write expertly on places as far-ranging as the Democratic Republic of Congo (where the agency initially planned to poison President Patrice Lumumba’s toothpaste, and instead ended up handing a quarter of a million dollars to Joseph Mobutu, the country’s future dictator, who facilitated the assassination) and Afghanistan (where the C.I.A. has had forty years of illusory gains and worse losses). But the biggest problem may be the agency’s own pattern of self-deception. Holt, for example, sometimes seems to go wrong when, rummaging through the archives, she gives too much credit to contemporaneous internal assessments of an agent’s or an operation’s worth.
In truth, the C.I.A. has had a “defining failure” for every decade of its existence—sometimes more than one. For Moynihan, in the nineteen-nineties, it was the lack of foresight about the Soviet Union; in the two-thousands, it was the phantom weapons of mass destruction, followed by torture and, in still evolving ways, by the drone-based program of targeted killings, with its high toll of civilian deaths. Barack Obama’s rapport with John Brennan, the C.I.A.’s director from 2013 to 2017, seems to have brought him to accept the view that the killing of American citizens abroad was acceptable, if managed prudently. The overuse of the agency on the battlefield is due not to a military-manpower shortage but to wishful thinking about the benefits of secrecy and of a lack of accountability.
It’s difficult to know, at this point, what the C.I.A.’s next defining failure—or, if one tries to be optimistic, its stabilizing success—will be. Donald Trump has had a complicated relationship with the intelligence community—increasingly capitalized and abbreviated to I.C.—which is presently conducting a damage assessment regarding documents with classified markings that he kept at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida home. He might, of course, be reëlected, and have the C.I.A.’s tools at his disposal again. If the C.I.A. isn’t the place to turn for an expedient solution to foreign-policy problems, neither is it bound to be the place to turn for a solution to our democracy’s political problems.
“If you ask intelligence officers what misperceptions bother them most, odds are they’ll mention ethics,” Zegart writes. She quotes an official who complains that “people think we’re lawbreakers, we’re human rights violators.” She insists that “officers think about ethics a lot.” She portrays the agency as being filled with hardworking moms and dads who do a great deal of “agonizing.” No doubt she’s right. But if the C.I.A. keeps falling down all the same, something must be tragically amiss in the agency’s structure or culture, or both. All the talk of coups and assassination plots, Zegart worries, distracts people from understanding the C.I.A.’s more basic intelligence mission. In fact, the party most distracted by such activities—and by the military role it has taken on—seems to be the agency itself. ♦
An earlier version of this article misstated the numerical designation of the Space Force unit dedicated to intelligence.
Published in the print edition of the October 10, 2022, issue.

Could use a bit of advice/insight …So my Dad recently got diagnosed with early stages of dementia. It’s been really hard on our family, but recently has taken even bigger tole. My dad was always stubborn and now with his diagnosis he has become a man child. He’s driving my mom insane. He won’t leave her alone for a second of the day. And if she’s not at home with him he continues to call her until she answers asking her what time she will be home. (Happens almost everyday) my mom works part time a clothing store and my dad has even gone as far as waiting for her to get off her job at a restaurant across the building. My dads health is partly deteriorating because he doesn’t take care of himself and claims that doctors are “full of shit” for example he doesn’t like drinking water or staying active he likes to just lay around. Has never attempted to exercise in his senior age or ever (67). Nothing will get through to him. He’s even gotten into 2 fender benders (both his fault) because he’s losing his vision in one eye. And now that we’ve taken his carkeys he’s gone as far as asking neighbors/different family for a ride to see if my mom is working. My parents had 5 children and all of us are grown oldest is 42, youngest is 26. Here’s the dilemma since my dad obviously needs someone to help him with the simplest tasks/errands and also distract him from not bothering my mom at her job. How should we approach this situation? It gets trickier as well because my youngest brother (26) has functioning Asperger’s and one of my older sisters (37) believes she is too good to work for an hourly wage (still lives at home) she has stopped working since 2020. My oldest sister (38) lives 1.5 hours away and my oldest brother (42) has been stepping up taking care of some of these issues with my dad. I’ve been trying to help a little myself but admittedly haven’t been able to make more time because I work full time and have a dog and gf. We have obviously asked my older sister (37) to step up her responsibilities since she literally has none (lives rent free at home, no bills) but claims she can’t handle my dad because he doesn’t “respect her” “listen to her” now all my siblings turn a blind eye to her and continue to begrudgingly support her leeching lifestyle and now are saying that “I’m not doing enough” that I should be one taking responsibility of our dad. It’s making feel so invalidated idk what to do anymore. My defense mechanisms are telling me to close myself off, but I value my family and peace of mind

When I mention spiritual fathers, I'm talking about men who have God's heart for the younger generations and for those who are younger than them. I'm not talking about a special office or about men who take the title of spiritual father. Like the Pharisees of Jesus's day, many people want a title but not many people want the responsibilities that come with a title.
BTW older men includes men in their 20s to 30s depending on how young the younger person is.
The Old and New Testaments both say and show a lot about the need for spiritual fathers as well as the continued or customary absence of spiritual fathers.
At the end of Malachi God said He would eventually give older men hearts for younger people so He can bless rather than curse the entire planet (Mal. 4:5-6), and Paul told the Corinthians that they had many ministers who told them how to live for God but that they didn't have many who actually walked with them in their walk with God. He stated emphatically, "But you have not many fathers" (1Cor. 4:15).
Statistics show that children from single father homes do as well as children from homes with both parents and that children from single mother homes have a high likelihood of becoming statistics (eg. homelessnes, drug addiction, suicide, criminality, runaways, etc.). So, even the secular world has evidence on the overall need for fathers. But where are they?
Last night I saw a post on one of the christian subreddits where someone had resolved to commit suicide before the end of the night. Everyone had failed him. He wrote, "Taking my life today. God please forgive me. Not every child of God makes it. I've tried but nothing has worked... I want to be at rest and not in agony". I don't know if he's still alive. These things don't happen when spiritual fathers are present.
Famous Pastor Rick Warren's son committed suicide right after an evening meal with his own parents. These things don't happen when spiritual fathers are present.
The end of King Hezekiah's life in the Bible has some good lessons on how common it is for even men who have children to not have a father's heart. If you pause to look at people you interact with or people around you, you'll often see orphans, people without a strong father [figure] in their lives. Strong fathers don't beget or impart hopelessness, suicide, sorrow, promiscuity, sexual perversions, spiritual bondage, rebellion, addictions, lack, selfishness, dishonesty, moral weakness, deferred hopes, lack of identity/confusion/gender dysphoria, etc., but those seem to be all you see these days.
I talked with several people today and the proof for them is that God doesn't care about them. But just like Job told his friends, even if God doesn't care about people, people should still care about each other.
This really is an appeal to older christian men. Believe me, you guys don't have a good reputation even within christian circles. God called men to sacrifice for the benefit and not just those in your families. Sacrifice for others is within the burning core of masculinity and is why men built the whole world, maintain societal infrastructure, and risk their lives to go to war so their countries-- made up mostly of people they don't know-- can be safe or, literally, saved.
As men get older, God does expect them to act as spiritual fathers to younger people/men (this goes for women as they get older as well; everyone has a role and is expected to 'work'). (Example: Titus 2:1-8.) This is natural and is supposed to be normal. There are way too many fatherless people in this world who need to experience the care of a father-- a genuine concern that can restore and mend broken people in ways that nothing else can.
God has put certain unspoken mandates on all living things to know the difference between good and bad and right and wrong and to do the former and avoid the latter. Even animals have this. For christian men, one of these mandates is to look out for those who are younger just like older siblings naturally look or for younger siblings. It's a forgotten concept but it's still there in the conscience with the Holy Spirit bearing witness. It's just the right thing to do.