We’re dealing with people who think the best way to send a message is to hurt more people and destroy democratic institutions.

They watched the Titanic and thought the people losing their shit and dragging everyone down with them was a good play in a crisis.

At least if the ship goes down the rich quarters will be below water too! That way they’ll learn to treat us better next time.

Yeah Mormons don’t drink if other Mormons would find out. He’s drinking wine at home not in public.

Hey, I stayed at one of their homeless shelters. You should donate just for that. Where else will you get rotten food? Whose going to talk shit about you? Whose going to throw your fragile possessions during check in and treat what little you have as a toy?

Don’t you want people to have bloodstained linens to sleep on? How else are people going to stand in 110F heat for fucking hours while the idiot Berber Christians have their meetings?

I really appreciated how little time I spent there, how little I interacted with others, how little I asked, but I was always met with annoyance and contempt when I did ask for something. Like please may I have a pillow case not covered in blood? I know it’s a lot to ask!

They always walked away knowing they were good christians so good luck speaking up. The shelter ran by ex prisoners was much less degrading.

By the end of the article they’ve framed much of this as being pro-Hamas / anti-Israel when a collaborative encyclopedia was seemingly worried about appearing neutral.

There’s enough there to have a good argument about sources and consistent wording but the article keeps highlighting people who think it’s purely political and even that people probably didn’t read the issue, they just wanted to be pro or anti Israel.

There’s still a lot of people who call this a genocide because they feel / think it’s a genocide, not because they’re on a side. Having consistent wording is important because you should be able to speak the truth and still feel whatever you felt… it’s not about hating Israel. I guess the beginning of the article sort of captures that mindset.

It’s like an old 100 yo trend of writing headlines except it has gotten much more “slam”-filled. Crash blossoms / headlinese has evolved over time.

If you smoke weed you’re more likely to wear converse. It’s aesthetics. When someone says they’re anti abortion I usually see it as aesthetics. They want others to see them as being anti abortion. That’s what they get out of it.

It isn’t a literal belief. Democrats reduce abortions, much better than cons. Being anti abortion should mean voting for Democrats… IF you were still taking things literally. It’s not misinformation or lack of education, it’s misaligned priorities.

They’re just trying to be a tribe and signal allegiance. To have literal beliefs that you live by regardless of “your side” is a completely different game to what they’re playing.

He like red. You like blue. Everyone get purple. This, ooga booga, is more fair. Is better democracy, ooga booga.

Silver shirts to red caps.

At the very least it would balance out the stream of reports of Israel bombing / shooting yet another journalist / American / medic / humanitarian.

It’s Dean Koontz’s Frankenstein, not sure how popular that series was… The monster was named Deucalion, he was a good persona if I remember right… and he could teleport around the world.

My favorite name he was ever given is Deucalion.

Can’t have two extreme absolutes as your options

There can’t seriously be respectable, noteworthy people in Russia saying that banning Discord is a mistake because it helps the Russian military. That’s bizzaro world stuff even for them.

On paper it sounds funny, doesn’t it? How can a guy randomly saying everyone was bad in WW2 mean he secretly thinks Nazis were alright?

Easiest way to get at the logic is to dissect people who say “both sides are the same.” How can that mean they’re actually pro MAGA or whatever? Didn’t they just say that both sides are the same? That’s against the rules of English! But it makes sense if you dig deeper.

Not understanding what a person means and thinking that means they’re a bot? That is reddit shit, I’ll give you that.

Whitlam was a PM who opposed the US and was immediately ousted in a brazen display of “we own you.” Hence, a joke about the man in Slovakia being ousted for opposing NATO aspirations.

The terrorism tweet:

“History is only written with the blood of such people — to tell the stories of those martyrs who made history, built nations and brought about glory. Their blood is the lifeline of our faith until the day of judgment. May you rest in peace.”

Crazy how tame this messaging seems living around Christians / GOP.

A hidden device implanted on our cortex at birth should detonate when we suggest something like “We should let corporations solve global warming.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gough_Whitlam

The list is compiled by the MPA, a group that represents studios, etc. They work with our government, and to which degree I have no concrete idea, (edit: a trade association is supposed to work with governments on behalf of it’s members) but they merely submitted this list to our government. That’s according to the article and the torrent freak source.

I think the article wasn’t being clear and other comments seem to agree.

Sounds like you are describing a video game. The whole “if they say X it means X because those are the rules of the language.” I mean.