Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13   Go Down

Author Topic: The man in charge of the National Parks has his friggin' hat on backwards!  (Read 7745 times)

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6201
    • http:www.schewephoto.com

As a lover of the National Parks I'm very disappointed at what is happening to them under the current admin...particularly for the idiot in charge of the Dept of the Interior, Ryan Zinke #sad

Hey, Ryan Zinke: You’ve Got Your Ranger Hat on Backward



Quote
Above is a picture of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke posing for a photo last week to promote a new children’s version of the National Park Service passport book. So far, so good, right? Well, upon closer examination, you might notice he’s wearing his hat backward.



Why does this admittedly small detail matter? According to the NPS’s official uniform regulations, “The ranger hat is the most important, recognized and respected symbol associated with the NPS, and should be worn with pride and care.” (The bolding comes straight from the NPS.) 



Here's the hat in it's correct orientation. You'd think the USNPS embossing would be hard to miss, and hard to get backwards, right? "The hatband is to be worn with the USNPS logo centered in the front," read the Park Service's uniform regs. The brass buttons should be over the wearer's left shoulder. (Smithsonian Museum)

“Our uniform represents our pride and commitment to serving our country by protecting our most cherished public lands,” says a park ranger I spoke with on Thursday. (He asked not to be named for fear of reprisal from the DOI.) “If I posted to the Internet a photo out of uniform and wearing my ranger hat backwards, I would at the very least receive a verbal thrashing from my chief.”

But that's Trump's MO...hire putzes and idiots or just downright evil people....ain't America Great?

And here's where it gets weird...

Canadian company moves to mine on lands cut from monument

Quote
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — A Canadian company's plans to mine for copper and cobalt on Utah lands that were cut from the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument by President Donald Trump are angering conservation groups that are suing to keep the lands under monument protection.

Conservation and paleontology groups called attention this week to plans announced earlier this month by Glacier Lake Resources Inc. The company said in a news release it would begin surface exploration this summer and that drilling will be permitted shortly.

But officials from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining told the Deseret News that the company hasn't filed any paperwork seeking permission to start operations.

From this Press Release, they are serious...
ACQUISITION OF COLT MESA COPPER-COBALT PROPERTY, UTAH, SURFACE GRAB SAMPLES RETURN 0.88% Copper and 2.31% Cobalt.

So, we're gonna make America great again by letting Canadian company mines what was supposed to be a National Park?

Really?

-edited to fix typo-
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 02:06:28 AM by Schewe »
Logged

OmerV

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 276
    • Photographs

And he’s posing with a stuffed bear. An omen of what’s in store for the parks and monuments under his “guidance.”

Better get those cameras out into the wild now. In the future we may just have giant landscape dioramas to remember what nature was like in the New Great America.

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11102
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com

Same old problem, Alan. It's the Washington Post, and they actually want me to pay money to read their fake news. If you'll pay for me I might at least glance at it.

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11102
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com

As a lover of the National Parks I'm very disappointed at what is happening to them under the current admin...particularly for the idiot in charge of the Dept of the Interior, Ryan Zinke #sad

Absolutely, Jeff. Wearing your hat backward is at least as dangerous to our national security as keeping top secret, limited access material on an unsecured server. We probably should prosecute the guy for wearing his hat backward.

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14221
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

Absolutely, Jeff. Wearing your hat backward is at least as dangerous to our national security as keeping top secret, limited access material on an unsecured server. We probably should prosecute the guy for wearing his hat backward.
The big difference is one woman knew what she was doing (nothing illegal) the other guy doesn’t (nothing illegal).
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11102
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com

The big difference is one woman knew what she was doing (nothing illegal). . .

Nothing illegal? Ask the people in the military who've been prosecuted for security violations with classified documents a lot less egregious than those, Andrew, whether or not that's illegal.

When I see a statement like that the Duke of Wellington's famous riposte echoes in my mind: "If you believe that, madam, you will believe anything."

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11916
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website

Oh, dear! Oh, the horror!

What’s next for the Coffee Corner (and breaking news)... mismatched socks?

jeremyrh

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 827

Same old problem, Alan. It's the Washington Post, and they actually want me to pay money to read their fake news. If you'll pay for me I might at least glance at it.

Predictable as ever, Ray pops up to defend the indefensible. Hell, if a conservative were shown to be ripping children from their mothers he'd find a way to make it Obama's fault.

Oh...

Hang on a mo...
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14221
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

Nothing illegal?
For Hillary, those are the facts you cannot wrap your head around like your inability to understand what climate change is.
Quote
Ask the people in the military who've been prosecuted for security violations with classified documents a lot less egregious than those, Andrew, whether or not that's illegal.
Should I ask those that WERE prosecuted or those who were not? Like your misunderstandings of change (climate for sure), there's a difference between being prosecuted and being 'charged' and found not guilty, as we saw with Hillary.
Next you'll tell us, people are guilty until proven innocent if you're a Democrat, but if you're Trump (or people on his campaign who are facing prosecution), you're innocent and shouldn't even face a trial. 
All why convinced that anything written you haven't read yet, is fake simply because of the source. Which is why it appears, so many don't take you seriously.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14221
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

Predictable as ever, Ray pops up to defend the indefensible. Hell, if a conservative were shown to be ripping children from their mothers he'd find a way to make it Obama's fault.
Expected behavior for those in the 'bubble'.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11102
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com

. . .there's a difference between being prosecuted and being 'charged' and found not guilty, as we saw with Hillary.

Really? When was Hillary charged, Andrew? And by which grand jury? She never was charged and so never was found not guilty. On the other hand, we actually saw the evidence: the discovery of classified material on her unsecured server. For anybody but Hillary that'd be a felony.

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14221
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

Really? When was Hillary charged, Andrew?
Exactly! No need.

Horowitz’s report also determined that Lynch’s lapse in judgment did not grant Comey license to make his own recommendation public. In his public remarks at the time, Comey called Clinton “extremely careless” with classified information, but said there was no basis for charging her with a crime. From the IG report:

We concluded that Comey’s unilateral announcement was inconsistent with Department policy and violated long-standing Department practice and protocol by, among other things, criticizing Clinton’s uncharged conduct. We also found that Comey usurped the authority of the Attorney General, and inadequately and incompletely described the legal position of Department prosecutors.

Here's a ULR you'll be happy to nav to as it fits inside your bubble:
https://www.infowars.com/the-history-of-hillarys-crimes/
Rubbish but enjoy.  ;D
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11102
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com

Horowitz’s report also determined that Lynch’s lapse in judgment did not grant Comey license to make his own recommendation public. In his public remarks at the time, Comey called Clinton “extremely careless” with classified information, but said there was no basis for charging her with a crime. From the IG report:

Exactly. Comey was way outside his job description. I saw the exchange several times. Gowdy made clear what the law said, and Comey brushed past that and ignored Gowdy's statement and the law.

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14221
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

Exactly. Comey was way outside his job description. I saw the exchange several times. Gowdy made clear what the law said, and Comey brushed past that and ignored Gowdy's statement and the law.
And yet, no charges. From anyone since. For obvious reasons to some.
I saw Gowdy yesterday in session, grilling the FBI chef, he didn't ask a question in his 5 minutes provided to him! He grandstanded again. He told us the Mueller investigation has gone on too long (13 months) while he saw no issue going massively longer chairing the Benghazi investigation a couple years Another hypocrite you really shouldn't be referencing to.   
http://theweek.com/speedreads/782008/trey-gowdy-who-headed-benghazi-investigation-more-than-2-years-claims-mueller-taking-long
Free, but you'll call it fake news.... Even though the facts are factual!
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

Jeremy Roussak

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7105

Predictable as ever, Ray pops up to defend the indefensible. Hell, if a conservative were shown to be ripping children from their mothers he'd find a way to make it Obama's fault.

Oh...

Hang on a mo...

Jeremy, I have already firmly indicated that that topic is now absolutely off limits. Consider this a final warning: raise it again and you will be banned.

Jeremy
Logged
(formerly kikashi)

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11102
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com

And yet, no charges. From anyone since. For obvious reasons. . .

I'll certainly agree the reasons are obvious, but that may change. Gowdy didn't need to ask questions. We all know the score. The top of the justice department may be facing a summer cleaning.

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14221
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

I'll certainly agree the reasons are obvious, but that may change.
And that may not change. IF and when it does change, ping us.
Gowdy didn't need to ask questions because his role wasn't to get answers.
You know the score you wish to believe, speaking for everyone ("we all know the score") shows desperate posting bias, an absurd statement. When the 'game is over', when perhaps Mueller provides his report, more of us will know the score. Until then, people you Gowdy who don't know will not cease from providing a report to his base as we saw yesterday while like you, ignoring the hypocrisy of saying the investigation has gone on too long. As for a summer cleaning, that's possible. As we've seen, this administration doesn't act as if they have done nothing wrong, they act like they know they've done something wrong; just my personal observation. When the data is provided (data some here will ignore before it is provided), those of us with open minds will examine it. It's absolutely possible Trump and his staff did nothing wrong. And if Mueller provides that, I'll gladly accept it. IF he's allowed to finish his work. That so many don't want him to, shows a bias that appears to be the agenda of the guilty.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers"

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3079
    • A Goldhammer Photography

Really? When was Hillary charged, Andrew? And by which grand jury? She never was charged and so never was found not guilty. On the other hand, we actually saw the evidence: the discovery of classified material on her unsecured server. For anybody but Hillary that'd be a felony.
Colin Powell also used an unsecured email server during his tenure as Secretary of State.  While it was the subject of several Washington Post stories, this LINK should pass the "paywall test."
Logged

LesPalenik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1536
    • advantica blog

Back to the OP. It was easy to fix the hat position. And nobody got hurt.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13   Go Up