Muted ads playing sound
smooth_tea
1 Post – 93 Comments
Joined 1 years ago
Please do tell what could go wrong. Is the internet sheriff going to turn up?
I don't know if it is that off-base to be honest, restraint does not mean that they practiced pacifism, just that the response was disproportionately small.
Hamas could stop hiding in civilian populations.
Is there anything you fools don't gobble up and repeat like a mantra? Do you question anything you hear at all?
No.
"There is no hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the attacks of 9/11". -FBI
Of course, there is no evidence for KSM's involvement either. He was tortured more than 100 times over the course of a month. The 9/11 commission had no access to him, not even his "interview" transcripts. Everything we know is from the mouths of the CIA agents who interrogated him, who admitted that he was completely unreliable.
That's like blaming Jews during world war 2 for putting up resistance against their fascist rulers. It is such a mischaracterization of the situation that it is damaging to the Palestinian people.
I know a 5 year old who shoved a crayon up his nose.
Israel and the Occupied Territories: Shielded from scrutiny: IDF violations ... https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/mde151432002en.pdf
Palestinian children tortured, used as shields by Israel: U.N. | Reuters https://www.reuters.com/article/us-palestinian-israel-children-idUSBRE95J0FR20130620
I just thought I'd add this to counter the usual one sided view on the matter.
I'll take "how to repeat bad mistakes from recent history" for 500 Jim.
Did you sleep through the past 20 years or are you just not that observant?
How dumb do you need to be to think that this is about Hamas? Tell me, how long did you fall for the weapons of mass destruction excuse in Iraq?
This.
Crap I'll never be able to slide that into a casual conversation.
Is the way Israel has been treating Palestinians something they should've ignored? Or do you reckon that's why the attack occurred in the first place?
But let me guess, Hamas are terrorists and the IDF are well equipped soldiers so really Israel was just forced into this by evil people.
And before you reply with "I don't condone yadda yadda ya..", know that that's exactly what you're doing, that's exactly what the media is doing, by always forgetting about where this started, and always pointing to the reaction of the people that are being deprived of everything and slowly eradicated.
What you're insinuating here, if not bluntly stating it, is that Israel's hand was forced, validating their reaction, and in the same breath saying that before this attack, all was well.
You can no longer claim that "this is not the way to go about it" after flat out condoning and supporting Israel's reaction as it exposes your bias.
I think the point is to look past the idea of having to work just for the sake of an income.
What does "mass abortions" mean exactly in this context?
You're probably talking about Iceland's "100% abortion rate for people with down syndrome"? Which comes to about 1 or 2 cases per year.
Exaggerating much?
historic grievances again
Oh the irony.
and I myself am not attempting to broaden context in order to force an angle the article isn't making.
Why are people who defend Israel always such insufferable weasels?
You're hiding behind an article that already takes things out of context and then you act as though it is the right thing to do to not provide any.
Of course you can't "broaden the context", or your entire point would fall apart. This is what Israel and its supporters do, they pick an arbitrary point in time, pretend that the conflict started then, and use that as an excuse to escalate.
I find it extremely insulting to mine and our collective intelligence when someone tries to argue otherwise. Nobody buys your victim complex anymore, have some decency and self respect and stop peddling it.
The article actually states how much. 15% of the daily recommended amount.
You say that, but in her defense she was a prostitute.
What's silly is that you lot consistently see the situation on its head. Either you don't get what is going on, or you don't want to tell the truth.
Hamas is what happens when you do to people what Israel does. It's that simple. You cannot deprive an entire people of their dignity and commit atrocities for half a century and then complain when a section of them turns to violence. Anyone who suggests that is an idiot.
It's a bit late to worry about internal mics when everyone has their phone on them at all times.
MDMA not worth it? It's euphoria and love in a pill, not addictive, and quite safe when you do not abuse it. Millions of people use it and have been using it for about half a century and the vast majority of it restricts it to when they're partying with few side effects. I think you misjudge its use a bit.
Yes it can be acutely abused because you're chasing the dragon on nights that you do use it, but that is also a result of its illegal nature and a lack of education.
Of the chemical variants of drugs, I'd say it's probably one of the few that is actually worth it, besides LSD.
You using 4 towels isn't hurting anyone anymore than me using one towel does.
I can only guess where the idea of wastefulness is such an alien concept that it's completely overlooked here.
I suggest you ask a woman who has been raped whether she agrees that it should be compared to a cow's artificial insemination.
Everyone is so keen on resorting to the worst possible choice of words, with the end result being that they lose all meaning and its use shits on those who've actually gone true it. Perhaps you should think about that before you next try to signal your virtues.
You sound so utterly clueless about the whole thing. And stupid to boot.
Yeah, basically ecstacy is MDMA plus fillers. The former is in pill form, the latter generally as crystals.
That's like poking a bear and then halfway through your shenanigans claim you'll have to put it down because you're in danger. What a bunch of hollow rhetoric. There's 3 sentences in your paragraph and each one is just a slogan. Each one vague enough that it means both nothing and anything you can think of.
Diverting from the usual warmongering is not isolationism, in fact, the problem you allude to is the result of the former, not the other way around.
I know it's a crazy idea but perhaps we should look at our failed approaches from recent history and try to learn from it. But judging from your edit, you have an extremely short attention span mixed with tunnel vision. Where were you when the US and its allies assassinated people inside Iran? Funded terrorist groups to carry out attacks in Iran? Sabotaged their nuclear facilities? Or, you know, when the idea of another pre-emptive attack on that nation was so imminent that one presidential candidate figured it'd be funny to fuel that by singing "bomb bomb Iran", based on nothing but the lie that they were close to getting a nuclear bomb?
Was all that a festering problem that Iran should've responded to, or is it different when you're on the receiving end?
How is any of that based on something besides your personal preference? What does quite bad mean? And what is "close to alcohol?" How much alcohol? How high?
I've also never met a person that drinks A beer. I've met lots that drink beers and call it a beer to minimize their habits though.
No offense but your opinion sounds like an anti drug ad from the 90's made by someone who's yet to admit their drug of choice is even a drug.
Maybe we should talk about how many people Israel pays to constantly skew reality in their favor on websites like that.
https://www.politico.eu/article/israel-social-media-opinion-hamas-war/
https://theintercept.com/2024/02/07/gaza-israel-netanyahu-propaganda-lies-palestinians/
https://electronicintifada.net/content/inside-israels-million-dollar-troll-army/27566
Pro tip if this happens, add more water.
To me, a European, he was one of the very few, if any, candidates that made sense and seemed consistent in how he voted and spoke. And I consider myself to be quite libertarian.
I don't really understand your remark to be honest, other than shoehorning the "he made a racist remark" thing into the conversation. Perhaps you could elaborate.
It's just a tighter grouping of (biased) data that can be searched and retrieved a bit quicker.
How is your intelligence different from being "biased data that can be accessed"?
The fact that something can reason about what it presents to you as information is a form of intelligence. And while this discussion is impossible without defining "reason", I think we should at least agree that when a machine can explain to you what and why it did what it did, it is a form of reason.
Should we also not define what it means when a person answers a question through reasoning? It's easy to overestimate the complexity of it because of our personal bias and our ability to fantasize about endless possibilities, but if you break our abilities down, they might be the result of nothing but a large dataset combined with a simple algorithm.
It's easy to handwave the intelligence of an AI, not because it isn't intelligent, but because it has no desires, and therefore doesn't act unless acted upon. It is not easy to jive that concept with the idea that something is alive, which is what we generally require before calling it intelligent.
That's BS. It's impossible for something like pihole to block ads like the ones we get on YouTube/Android tv because they are served from the same domain as the regular content and a pihole doesn't know the difference.
The only way to block them is to run unofficial apps that replace YouTube and the likes.
People who separate anything they eat are heathens. The proper way is to stuff bits of everything on your plate in your mouth at once for the correct taste and texture sensory overload.
I'm not asking you to take my word for it. Do with it as you please.
I'll provide one just to pique your interest.
Despite the presence in cannabis smoke of known carcinogens, toxic gases, and particulates, cannabis smoking does not seem to increase risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or airway cancers. In fact, there is even a suggestion that at low doses, cannabis smoking may be protective for both conditions.
Or heck, another one.
However, after adjusting for age, gender, race, smoking history, and CCI, the results indicated that cannabis use could significantly lower the risk of getting COVID-19 [adjusted OR (AOR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.71–0.92, P = 0.001].
So he was a fascist/racist who spent his entire life in politics without ever showing a sign of that ideology, was he waiting to spring his trap?
I'm not here to vouch for the guy, I'm just on the outside looking in, but this seems like a bunch of conjecture in its purest form.
Also, am I reading you correctly that you think racism is a great vehicle to sell the idea of libertarianism?
Yep, also Oreos are overrated!
Well you can find quite a few scientific studies saying exactly what I've said. I agree that plant based oils are not all the same though.
Just one example:
3918 of those who cooked with vegetable/gingili oil had ASCVD, and 249 of those who cooked with lard/other animal fat oils had ASCVD. The prevalence of ASCVD in vegetable/gingili oil users (31.68%) was higher than that in lard/other animal fat oil users (17.46%). Compared with lard/other animal fat users, the multivariate-adjusted model indicated that vegetable oil/sesame oil users were significantly associated with a higher risk of ASCVD (OR = 2.19; 95%CI, 1.90-2.53). Our study found that cooking with lard/other animal fat oil is more beneficial to cardiovascular health in older Chinese.
How is this getting upvotes? That's like saying your cow's name is actually "mammal". The post was not about a general term to label a group of things.
Oh right, so you were talking about the content, that's not what I understood under "frontend". Thanks for clearing it up.
I don't have any experience with the platform, so I'm not in a position to judge their decisions, but it's always tricky when you present yourself as censor free. There's things you obviously don't want on your service, but if it falls within the legal realm, it is no longer a matter of "will we block Nazi material" but whether from that point onward you start taking a moral and political stance.
Things get incredibly tricky and cumbersome if you choose that route, not just from an administrative perspective but also technically. I can understand why the people who operate the platform would prefer to primarily use legality as a deciding factor, as not every ideological issue that you open yourself up to if you take the other route is as straightforward as fascism.
That's like ejaculating on someone's face and then working your way to foreplay. If this isn't against the Geneva convention it should be.
In what world would a country in a similar situation not support groups that try to counter an invading force? What about the assassinations inside Iran? The terrorist attacks orchestrated by the west? The sabotage of their nuclear facilities? How is it that those things can go on for decades, and then when Iran finally reacts, people go "oh look what these maniacs did, how dare they!"
Do you not care that Iran was on the receiving end of these things, or were you simply not aware?
Iran has been notoriously docile because it knows the US had been looking for an excuse to attack it. Just like Wesley Clarke stated.