Started by tecsan at 09,Oct,20 08:17 other posts of tecsan
 | Just looking for opinions...Please no fights...༼☯﹏☯༽ |
Similar topics: 1.Does it actually matter? 2.SYD is a great place 3.Trump/Pence or Biden/Harris...Which do you feel will prevail??? 4.Kneeling before the American Flag during the National Anthem... 5.༼☯﹏☯༽
Would it's mindset ,attitudes ,actions, define it? Or would The Holy Spirit be gender neutral?
Everything in the bible describes Jesus as a person who respected people for who they are. His character is obviously described as a man, identifying as a man. But, he could be expected to adopt gender-neutral pronouns, purely out of support for a subjugated group of people.
Jesus spoke a Galilean dialect of Aramaic. "The lack of specific feminine forms for the pronouns is also found in Biblical Aramaic, which has different forms for third person singular (hu versus hi), but not always for the plural,53 and the second person feminine singular does not exist at all (Quimron 1993: 65)."
God is described in the bible as making Adam in his image.
However, most Christians describe God as a being outside of time and space.
How and why would such a being have a human body with a dick&balls?
But you were not in Jesus's head, maybe he wanted to be female. And maybe he secretly identified as female.
It's also very much possible that he was gay, if you read the stories.
only registered users can see external links
The fact is, that the first letter of his stories were written decades after he died.
It's possible that Jesus is completely fictional or based on several different people, living in that time period. There is no evidence that he ever existed, besides what's written about such a character in the bible. Different people wrote similar but different stories about the Jesus character, but it's clear that they were copying each other. There are lots of similar stories, about similar people, originating from earlier and other cultures, that are clearly mythical. There might have been some carpenter's son, walking around telling stories and performing rudimentary healthcare, that would have been miraculous in that time. Add a few decades and stories get mixed and exaggerated. Religions have been started over less. It is no evidence of anything supernatural ever happening and no reason to base your morality on the morality
of Jews from 2 millennia ago.
Is that it? Or is there more?
Because I agree that is pretty bad. Supporting Palestinians is the opposite of supporting the terrorists, who not only killed and kidnapped many innocent people,
but now obviously also assured the impending murder of many Palestinians by Israel.
Meanwhile, you are saying that the whole Gaza strip should be taken in by Israel.
That is a horrific statement that you should be ashamed for.
But save yourself the trouble, because it doesn't matter.
A terrorist has no level of depth, they don't want to descend to.
That's why no one cares when Israel kills those terrorists.
But there are standards that nation states have to uphold.
That's why they shouldn't lower themselves to the level of terrorists.
Do you understand that? It very much appears like you don't.
I am not going to 'research' all the incredibly incremental and anecdotal shit,
that you want me to look at, because you are not taking your responsibility
to do general research into world problems that really matter.
Are you telling something new, that I didn't 'research'?
For everything that happens in the world, you just listen to propaganda.
I do the hard thing; researching the causes and solutions.
You don't add anything significant to that discussion.
Israel descents bombs that kill innocent people. At least 8,000 now.
More than 40% of the Palestinians killed in Gaza are children,
the child death toll has reached 3,457 yesterday.
I asked you a question:
Should nation states lower themselves to the level of terrorists?
I do not support the killing of civilians, even if they agree with terrorist acts,
and of course I do not support killing children, not by intent and not 'by accident'.
I do not support Hamas; I am fine with Israel killing every single one of them, without a trial. It's not what a civilized country should do, but clearly you are OK with a country just executing people they call terrorists. I agree it would be to much to ask to arrest and judge all Hamas terrorists, therefore just hunting them down and shooting them is fine by me. However, I draw the line at bombing whole apartment buildings for a claim that there are Hamas terrorist hiding there. That is causing too much collateral damage.
Now, if that is too much to ask, from a country which calls themselves a democracy, then it is lowering itself to the level of terrorists. I do not support terrorist act, not from Hamas and not from Israel. That makes me better than YOU. Even while I don't believe in a soul or karma, supporting terrorist acts is something my conscience does not allow. I don't know if you expect to be judged by a god after you die, but if you do, ask yourself if that god would be OK with you supporting what Israel is doing. Maybe the god from the old testament would allow it, but I thought Christians supported Jesus. And that Jewish socialist hippie would not like you, for many reasons, but also for this.
I don't want Israel to be genocidal maniacs, because that WILL cause more hate and extremism. That's the opposite of supporting terrorists.
I want less terrorists, not more. When will you understand that your way of 'fighting terrorism' only creates MORE OF IT? You really didn't learn anything from Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." Albert Einstein
Why should I care about censure of congress persons?
Those are just political games. That's not what censure is intended for.
You answered (Nov 11, 00:46): "Hell fucking yes,..."
I asked you: "Is there a level of brutality that you would criticize Netanyahu for, or does he have carte blanche?"
You answered (Oct 31, 04:41): "He has carte blanche, gold and platinum until all of them uncivilized savage SOB are dead and yes palestinians that support hamas as well."
On Oct 31, 23:50 you added: "That's what YOU ARE SAYING, by saying Netanyahu "has carte blanche, gold and platinum until all of them uncivilized savage SOB are dead and yes palestinians that support hamas as well." DAMN FUCKING STRAIGHT."
I said: "Stop bombing hospitals, schools and apartment buildings. Stop cutting off people from water, food and power. Stop doing genocide."
You answered (Nov 1, 23:39): "Like I stated to you, hard to do when the cowards use hospital and civilians for cover."
On Nov 1, 23:52 you said: "Yes it is end of time for some and it is the end of civilation for those left standing."
When you implied that Israel is trying to minimize collateral damage, I said "No they are not, that will not result in 8000 deaths, with more than 40% children."
You answered (Nov 3, 01:46): "Actually it does not matter how many deaths it takes if palestinian hamas is fucking annihilated. That will guarantee that they will not do anymore terrorist acts. They are fucking savages and deserve to die. Coward bastards hide behind innocent civilians, no how the fuck do you suppose we kill the fuckers without collaterl damage and ensure in the process they will do no harm to more innocents."
That's you clearly not caring about innocent Palestinians dying and supporting Netanyahu even if he kills ALL OF THEM. That's genocide. YOU ARE THE ONE WHO'S LYING!
Feel free to keep that crap up. I will not though. Again I do not mind if you feel it necessary. PM, 'p' means private.
If you don't want your PM's copy-pasted here, don't lie that I'm lying.
women and children around them.
It's like if a cop shoots an RPG into a crowd, to kill a murderer.
They can kill the terrorists, but not the civilians, period.
But Netanyahu wants to kill civilians, because he's an evil bastard.
Netanyahu even supported Hamas, so he would be allowed to kill civilians.
So if you want to kill Hamas supporters, start with Netanyahu.
But it's applicable that we have this discussion in this forum.
Your own question is: "do All lives matter...". Your answer is definitely: 'NO!'.
I must admit, this is a strange but good thing,
only registered users can see external links
So I guess i will go by there and eat a little more often.
Just because Israel does fucked-up shit, doesn't make Hamas good.
Israel is stealing land, because of their horrible religious beliefs.
Hamas just gave them the justification to steal more land and kill more Palestinians
and Israel is taking that justification. I would be surprised if they don't steal the North
of the Gaza strip now.
Hamas is just a horrible Islamic extremist organization, who is using the suffering
of the Palestinians to spread their horrible ideology.
There is no good side here, only evil sides.
Well, that would make them worse than Hamas, or don't you think so?
And what is keeping hamas from leaving with the palestinians just to come back when the shit settles down?
this is a terrible situation, but hamas had no business attacking for no reason ,that is why it is terrorism and a swift, brutal response is in order to deter further attacks
Israel has been in the cross hairs for so long,It is easy for me to understand why and how they came to this point of "fuck it, kill em all". Enough is enough. Israel was given the Jews in 1945 to try to give them a new start in the land holy to them,
hamas and iran are right in the same boat with hitler regarding the jews.it was fine to go after hitler but suddenly the jews are just supposed to sit back and take it?? Naw, let them defend themselves.They have been persecuted enough.
"Israel was given the Jews in 1945" People were already living there!
Only people who own something have the right to give that something away.
How would you like it, if we give your state to the Palestinians?
"Israel has been in the cross hairs for so long"
As they should be, for stealing people's houses and land.
I don't give a fuck if the land is holy to them. They don't have any more right to it than the people who lived there and also claim their land is holy to them.
Israelis and Palestinians are genetically indistinguishable from each other.
The only thing that divides them is those fucking religions.
Man, do I wish that people can finally get past that bullshit.
How would you like to be in a prison,watch your family be taken to a oven and burned, and be rescued, and given a home, only to grow up and have to fight just to be left alone?
All that has to happen is the hamas group be eliminated.
And hasbroloa or how ever you spell it. BUT the Palestinians aid and abet hamas, so are they innocent?
Don't you know any history? Then there was a new region that didn't exist before, stolen from Palestine and it was called Israel. Then from then forth, Israelis kept stealing houses and land and slowly or not so slowly enlarged Israel and reduced what was left of Palestine. They kept building houses for Israelis in occupied territory, breaking every treaty that was ever made and breaking international law.
Israel has been a horrible apartheid regime for decades.
They have never accepted the sovereignty of Palestine, they have never been serious about peace and they have only ever aspired to the destruction of Palestine.
"they are citizens and have a right to be just as any Palestinian has."
Then why are you allowing them to take it from the Palestinians?
No, the Palestinians are not innocent. As I told you before, there is no good vs evil here. There is just a people with longer rights to the land, which are the Palestinians, and there are conquerors, who are the Israelis.
Palestinians are stupid to look to horrible Islamic extremists for their protection, because horrible Islamic extremists don't care about people. They only care about spreading their ideology and they would sacrifice anyone for that goal.
It used to be acceptable to just create a big militia, enter an area that doesn't belong to you, kill and subjugate all the inhabitants and place your flag on it.
At some point, civilization decided that this is no longer acceptable. In the 18th century, the 'Right of Conquest' is a right of ownership to land after immediate possession via force of arms. It was recognized as a principle of international law. Then after the Second World War, the 'Right of Conquest' was outlawed as a crime against peace, introduced in the Nuremberg Principles, in 1945.
There is an argument for claiming that Palestine had been legitimately conquered by the British empire and the land of Israel was legitimately 'gifted' to the Jews, calling it Israel. However, international law has encouraged many conquering nations, who owned land they conquered before 1945, to give back that land to its original occupants. Still, I would personally recognize the original borders of Israel, but I consider it a crime against the freedom of religion, which was at that time laid down in every constitution, to define Israel in its declaration of independence as a "Jewish state". I also consider it a crime against international law, every time Israel expanded its borders at the detriment of the Palestinian state. According to international law, the colonies in occupied Palestine are illegal.
I'm sure you don't like how children are getting bombed to death either.
But you are still supporting Israel to keep doing that.
Nearly 5,100 Palestinians have been killed in the Gaza Strip,
nearly half of them are children. That's terrorism TOO!!!
How about being a 'realist' on that?
The truth, in my mind, is that all war is an act of terrorism, just in a bigger scale. We tend to separe killings by the number of people killed in each occasion. One person killing another is an act of terrorism. One nation killing five million +/- people is terrorism. Shooting innocent civilians from a hang glider is that too. Some people say that war is Hell. It’s a gentrified way of saying that in war, killing it expected without any concern for whom gets in the way.
As I’ve said before in different words, I’m mortified about the suffering of ALL CHILDREN, but not so much for the people that started this, directly or indirectly.
But I don't think you can say they 'started this'. This conflict has been going on for decades and the atrocities performed by Israel, during most of that time are just as horrible.
Before this terrorist act, Israel has been killing many Palestinian children too. They have snipers killing children from the guard towers. How is that different from Hamas' terrorist attack?
report on many cold-blooded murders.
If there is a justification for Israel to do horrible things, than your one-sided 'the past is the past' is not fair.
Your government has outlawed the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement, which non-violent international diplomacy support for the right of Palestinians to exist, so you cut of their methods for non-violent protesting. And when they do violent protests it is a justification to mass-murder them.
So what you're saying is that Palestinians should just shut-up and take whatever Israel does to them. What is left for them? Just wait until Israel or the rest of the world decides that they have a right to live somewhere too?
Public opinions on the BDS movement and anti-BDS laws
Edit
According to University of Maryland's Critical Issues Poll from October 2019, a majority of Americans oppose anti-BDS laws; 72% opposed laws penalizing people who boycott Israel and 22% supported such laws. The poll also found a strong partisan divide on BDS; among those who had heard of BDS, 76% of Republicans opposed the movement, compared to 52% of Democrats.[8] In a 2019 poll from Data for Progress 35% to 27% opposed anti-BDS laws. Split by party affiliation, 48% of Democrats opposed anti-BDS laws and 15% supported them; 27% of Republicans opposed anti-BDS laws and 44% supported them. 70%-80% believed boycotts were a legitimate protest tactic.[9] According to a 2022 survey by the Pew Research Center, 5% of Americans support BDS and 84% do not know much about it. 17% of Republicans have some familiarity with BDS compared to 15% of Democrats, while 7% of the latter and 2% of Republicans support the movement.[10]
CAT
Ananas, the laws you are talking about affect government contracts and entities, but, the public has access to the BDS and their political views. Bottom line? Israel and Palestine are now, and have been, in a state of war.
I know you have a narrow view of the freedoms we enjoy in this country, especially as to what’s available to us in the news. I believe you are confusing what the great unwashed of this country consider worthy of them to find out about with what is really available. That’s two different things.
Even if most people supported anti-BDS laws, it would still not be OK to pass them, because BDS is free speech, which is protected by your Constitution. Is it OK to pass laws that are in conflict with the Constitution?
It that 'a narrow view of the freedoms you enjoy in your country'?
When politicians in my country try to pass laws that are in conflict with our Constitution, they are immediately pushed back by either the House of Representatives or the Senate or not immediately but later some judge.
We don't even need a Supreme Court to get that right.
You do have a Supreme Court, who's only job is testing laws against the Constitution. How can your country fuck up that responsibility so much?
The people you elect are not doing what you want, but what their donors want.
Republicans made it even easier for themselves; they made their voters think they want what their donors want and they made them think what they get is what they want.
In short, the donors decide what you get. That's not democracy.
True, there are many other countries like that, but that doesn't make
it good. America once provided the best example for democracy.
You could do that again, but you got to have better standards for politicians. They should serve you and not just themselves.
It also relies on having choices for who to vote for
and accurate, objective information about those choices.
In a winner takes all system, like the US, the people are forced to vote for either one of the two corrupt parties, or their vote is meaningless. Since all your media is owned by big corporations who use it as their personal propaganda outlet, you are only getting told the truth, if they want you to know the truth and then they still always put their own spin on it.
That's why the US is ranked 36th by Quality of Democracy.
only registered users can see external links
You're followed by Cape Verde, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago.
Restoring democracy will happen when all the libs are ousted. You know that Ananas2xLekker.
BTW who the fuck cares what others think of us, we know you hate America as many other turds hate America.
How do you define democracy exactly? Sort of like Putin does?
their principles on how the country needs to be organized?
you are a much more civilized person to talk with even when in total disagreement than Leo. But I will say the same thing I said to him. along with the criticism, share some solutions. Jerusalem is where Jesus was born, that land is holy to the jewish people. millions were slaughtered by hitler, a group of civilized countrys, made it so their holy land would legally be their home. IF you watch the videos I posted on another thread for leo, Truman explains the people that left the land, were COMPENSATED for it, it was NOT stolen.
The only thing holy to a muslim is having your blood all over themselves while laughing and chasing a goat for pleasure.
Likewise, does Israel have no justification to commit terrorism.
The definition of terrorism is: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
Many acts of Israel are terrorism, by definition.
Still, Israel has the right to defend itself.
Israel is allowed to attack Hamas terrorists.
But their level of 'collateral damage' is unacceptable.
It's you, who is defending terrorism, not me.
Also Palestine has the right to defend itself.
If they attack an Israeli military target, that's not terrorism.
Just as it wouldn't be terrorism if Israel targets JUST Hamas.
It's the percentage of innocent civilians getting killed, that makes it terrorism.
It's the methods and the results that define terrorism, not which side commits it.
you have no idea how good you have it. They don't have a choice.
Throwing away freedom is easy, getting it (back) is almost impossible.
Even Netanyahu supported Hamas, because Hamas assures him no peace.
Whenever Hamas kills his people, he is justified to keep stealing more land.
only registered users can see external links
I would rather no innocent people were hurt or killed,I would rather hamas had never attacked those folks at that shin dig and killed them.BUT hamas did and now they are reaping the harvest from the seeds of hate and violence they sown, They hopefully will get a bountiful crop, looks like about half the place is flat already.
with your own concept of 'to the victor go the spoils'.
Just because that's often how war goes, doesn't mean it should be.
The traitors of your civil war were legitimately dealt with.
The south should have been under better control to not let racism brew,
but the citizens should have been protected and treated well.
There is however no parallel with the Israeli Palestine conflict, other than
who kills too many citizens as collateral damage is a war criminal.
"looks like about half the place is flat already."
Most likely! And then what? When the north of Gaza is flattened, push back all the Palestinians from the south back to the north and than flatten the south? Then all the Palestinians live among the rubble, even more dependent on Hamas to feed them and put a roof over their heads again. That wall is still there, Egypt and Libanon still don't allow them to leave.
It's either die, or support Hamas. With many of their children, spouses, family and friends having been killed by Israel, that sure is a hard choice, right?
I'm asking you; is that the intention?
only registered users can see external links
before Jim Crow.
Ben is already biassed on subjects that he doesn't care about.
How objective am I supposed to think he is on Israel, being Jewish?
He doesn't even consider the AIPAC to be the 'The Israel Lobby'.
The Daily Wire rakes in millions of dollars per large donor.
I have no idea what he really believes, because he gets paid
to believe whatever his donors want him to believe. He's a fraud!
But that's the consequence of stealing that land for themselves.
The Jews lived there for about 3000 years, but they lived together
with many other peoples and religions. People get upset,
if you kick them from their land and put your own flag on their land.
Is that so difficult to understand?
It's easier to kill all the natives when you conquer land, because then
they cannot bother you anymore. It's what your American ancestors did.
That's pretty bad though. Wouldn't it be a bit hypocritical, if the whole world
first united against Hitler, for exterminating 6 million Jews and then help those Jews to exterminate tens or hundreds of millions of Muslims, to clear out the whole Middle East, for themselves?
Besides, after WWII, there were about 3.8 million Jews left in the world.
That's not enough people to populate and protect the whole Middle East.
Israel was big enough for that population. It's just getting a bit small, now there are about 10 million of them. That's why they are stealing more land.
"Arab fears that Jews were attempting to seize control of Jerusalem's Wailing Wall in August 1929 caused a series of riots which left 133 Jews and 116 Arabs dead."
This was one more tic on the side of nationalization. The clincher was the 5,000,000+ Jews kIlled by the Nazis while other countries looked away.
They where willing to co-exist with other Arab people. Heck, in the nationalization Arabs were included.
Israel was clearly intended to be a Jewish nation state, and it turned
into an apartheid regime against Palestinians very quickly.
Don't take my word for it, read what Amnesty International writes about it.
only registered users can see external links
"Arab fears that Jews..." They feared correctly.
They have been under attack, because they have never stopped attacking.
It's like if you cut the tires of your neighbors car every night
and then go crying if he kicks your ass one day, when he caught you.
And then you kill him, his family, his friends and all his colleagues.
Another example then. I'm sure you heard of the IRA in Ireland?
They did some horrible terrorist attacks and killed children too.
So was it OK if Ireland then bombed the whole of Belfast to rubble?
Or how about if some gangsters from the Bronx kill the owner, his wife and the stock clerk of a 7/11. Is it now OK, to bomb the whole 'hood'?
Oct 11 (Reuters) - The fighting between Israel and Hamas, which launched a surprise attack on Saturday, is the latest in seven decades of war and conflict between Israelis and Palestinians that has drawn in outside powers and destabilized the wider Middle East.
you are not going to pull a "Trump" fake news, now, are you?
Of course, it's an analogy. Just like the other two examples.
Do you think it's not a fair analogy? If not, why not?
Have you seen what happens in Gaza now?
Do they show you or is it censored in the US?
I do not pick sides, when both sides are doing evil.
I just want the killing and suffering to end.
What do you see as the outcome of this? Does this solve anything?
Is this allowing Israel to administer revenge, until they feel satisfied?
Is leveling Gaza going to prevent future attacks? For how long?
Don't you think Hamas will be back with a vengeance in a few years?
And then what, do it all over again?
Yes, Hamas will return or some like group. Sometimes, people look at the near future only. In this case, I believe Israel reached a point where it wants some tranquility. You have to admit that it doesn't matter who threw the first punch long ago. The problem is with the present.
History does tend to repeat itself.
It is past time to let Israel do what needs to be done to END the violence. If the muslims aint got no more sense than to side with hamas or hazbrola or some other nit shit terrorist group, then blow them to hell.
there are times that call for dealing with a problem once and for all, and this is 1 of them. Problems with israel have been going on for decades,time to end it so the world can get on with fixing other problems.
the aid being sent there could be going elsewhere to folks who need it that didn't kill their way into the situation they are in.
--------------------------------------- added after 27 seconds
Hamas is a horrible organization. Israel is not.
Which means bombing or starving 2 million people to death?
I would like this to end too, but not in a Holocaust.
The realistic solution would be to force Egypt to take in ALL Palestinians as refugees and then let Israel take the whole Gaza strip. That would be less of a crime against humanity than flattening Gaza and then keep te surviving population starving among the rubble. You are literally asking Israel to starve every last person in Gaza. That would make them worse than anything any terrorist has ever done. It's even worse than Hitler's gas chambers. Do you really want the US to be complicit in that?
However, I don't think Netanyahu will end Gaza or Hamas.
He needs both Gaza and especially Hamas, to justify his killing and stealing the rest of the West bank.
Just like he propped up Hamas before, he will do it again, so Hamas can start bombing Israeli's again ASAP, and then Netanyahu can rinse and repeat this over and over and over, while stealing the rest of the West bank.
You are being horrible to support genocide.
And you are a dumb-ass to think Israel wants to solve anything.
The cost and logistics.
The US funds and arms Egypt too. Don't you find it incredibly strange how much your presidents cuck themselves to Israel? YOU PAY THEM and arm them and they get cocky with you.
You know why both Trump and Biden suck up to Netanyahu? Because there are lots of Pro-Israel Super-PACs giving contributions to the candidates of both parties. A lot of them aren't even Jews or Israelis, they are Christian conservative fundamentalists, who see Israel as important to their religion.
Those Christian fundamentalists are the same people who fill your politics and your airwaves with pro-Israel propaganda.
I'm not affected by that propaganda, because our politics isn't as muddled by campaign contributions and because we don't have that many Christian fundamentalists muddling in our politics and our media. Neither Israel nor Palestine mean anything to me. They are just two cultures fighting to live on the same plot of dust and rocks. I see one culture being sneaky bastards and constantly being dicks tot the other culture and I see the other culture lashing out in horrible hatred and violence, which is then answered with faux indignation and 10 times the violence.
There is no good vs bad, it's only and all fucking evil shit.
And what I find mostly ridiculous, is how people can think that there is an all-powerful, omniscient, and all-benevolent god in control of this all. There are three major religions involved and I see nothing but evil, petty, human stupidity at work.
That's like my country trying to conquer all the rest of Europe.
Israel has a pretty strong defense force, but Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt and Iran are stronger.
The attacking force always requires more soldiers and more weapons to make a dent against the defending force.
OK, Ukraine is still standing, but what chance do you think Ukraine would have had, when they had attacked Russia?
They could protect an Islamic ally.
Which countries could Israel conquer or be allowed to conquer realistically? Maybe Lebanon and Syria, because those countries are not really friends of the West. The West would not allow Israel to attack Jordan and Egypt. The other Muslim countries are behind those other countries. If Israel would want to attack Iraq or Iran, they would be at war with all the other Muslim countries too. Israel is very small. Sure, they have a strong military, but the combined force of the other Middle Eastern countries can wipe them off the map in no time. Those nukes are useless. If they use them, they start a nuclear war and get obliterated instantly. It only takes a few nukes to end Israel, but it takes many to end all those Middle Eastern countries. The US is not going to back them up. That's not being a traffic cop, that's protecting your own oil interests.
very cheap fuel prices. I still pay $7.77/gallon for Euro95,
and that's at the cheapest gas station in the area.
Don't you pay less than half that?
What is left can only be extracted by fracking.
This is destroying your dwindling water sources.
You're sacrificing your agriculture and health, for oil.
That's why alternative energy isn't just the smart thing
to do to reduce climate change. It also reduces pollution.
And it reduces our dependency on horrible tyrannical regimes, like Saudi Arabia and Russia.
If it's the former, I have no knowledge or opinion about the organisation. But "All Lives Matter" is not an organisation, so if it is the former, the question doesn't really make sense.
If it's the latter, the saying clearly means "black lives matter as much as white lives". Does anyone here disagree with this sentiment?
Dgraff, remember, you started this.👿
then everyone would surely be happy to support it.
Here's a novel idea; implement the goals.
Why does it require endless protesting to do something?
Are the riots not just a justification for you to say 'fuck you!'?
Are the demands so outrageous?
Or is it now just stubbornness, to not 'give THEM anything'?
The Black Panthers, I think. Black clothes, different kind of 'hoods',
but also very much supporting the 2nd amendment.
only registered users can see external links
Cheating wife, hung her self instead of taking responsibility.
DUH.
Not to mention has no ethics either.
I guess if it makes a 'buck' then it is fair to the *%*#@!& party.
Where the hell is 'cornpop' when we need him?
only registered users can see external links
The writer of the book focused on just 10 billionaires, donating to 50 organizations, that were instrumental in pushing an agenda of institutionalized racism and crushing the public school system. That was 3.2 billion dollars that he was able to trace.
Why do wealthy people want to crush public schools?
Are they thinking private schools are better?
Are they just not willing to pay taxes for public schools?
Are they against poor people getting a good education?
Are they not dependent on smart people working for their companies?
Are they against American being smart, to understand how they get screwed?
That's of course nonsense. Billionaires fund organizations and politicians
they agree with and then they go do the work for them.
Mostly it comes down to legislation and funding decisions.
Shutting down schools in black areas hurts black people, but you too.
Do you prefer black people to be educated or turn into criminals?
The president appoints the judges. Trump appoints his 'beautiful conservative' corporate minded judges and Biden appoints a bit more liberal judges.
If you are in a legal dispute against some company that is crushing you,
you can be sure you want one of Biden's judges, because any of Trump's judges
will always speak out in favor of any company over any working class civilian,
no matter how much the law agrees with you.
Civil, I will take the Trump appointee, atleast they have common sense and know the difference between a man and a woman.
If you think you can win in civil court against a company that screwed you, out of money or your house or your health, with a Trump appointee, you're very much confused.
But, you might think of getting sued by someone you discriminated, sure then you are better off with a Trump appointee.
They indeed prioritize your kind of 'common sense' over the actual LAW.
Talk about defrauding the poor tax paying people, what do you consider witholding millions unless you comply with my demands. Son of a bitch, you are a disgraceful biden.
It takes a sorry son of a bitch to ignore his own grand
daughter. What a moron.
Can you clarify what you are talking about?
Are you referring to Trump, withholding congressionally approved military aid
to Ukraine, to help himself, which is actually against the law?
When your son hasn't acknowledged his daughter yet, any father would wait until his son is ready to come out with it.
When you are the president, you first wait for evidence.
There are always people that try to discredit their family.
Now the evidence is in and Hunter accepted it, Joe does too.
Biden with-holding tax payer money from Ukraine until a prosecutor is fired. Hell, everyone here can see it, I guess you are playing the part of the ostrich.
only registered users can see external links
But, if there is evidence Biden broke the law, present it to the courts and wait until after his presidency to start the indictments. It's your own site that claims that the law cannot indict a sitting president.
Or indict and try to convict Biden now, so he can pardon himself, which is what your side thinks a president should be able to do.
Or do they only care how much they suck up to Trump?
Vivek Ramasmarmy made his billion dollars by investing in and hyping a scam biotech pharmaceutical product. His company Roivant Sciences is described as having a "business strategy, which involves buying patents from pharmaceutical companies, further developing the patented drugs, and bringing the finished drugs to market.".
I know how that works. Those companies are developing shit. They are just gaining the system, taking government funded ideas for pharmaceuticals and then hyping them, marketing them, and then walk away with billions. Sometimes those drugs are useful, but most newly developed drugs fail their clinical trials.
Companies like his', take billions of tax-dollars and more billions of the industry, only making the development of drugs more expensive for the tax-payer and the final products more expensive for patients.
He bought up the Alzheimer’s treatment Intepirdine, developed by the biotech startup Axovant Sciences, raised $315 million, before starting clinical trials, probably for a large part from Alzheimer's Foundation donations, ballooned the business value to
$3 billion, then sold his shares, and then the drug failed the trials. He's just a leech.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Alot of liberals make money shitting people, He at least made his money doing something.
you call it hyping, most Entrepeneur's call it promoting. That is what investors do ,that is how our retirement systems are funded, by investments.
What has biden done besides be a career politician and a life guard that had little girls rub the hair on his legs?
I also condemn liberals when they make money by scamming people,
you just condemn liberals when they do something immoral,
but you defend any right-winger, no matter what they do.
Why aren't you condemning Soro's? He bankrupted nations for crying out loud,
only registered users can see external links
Why has George Soros purchased news outlets throughout America? Living in Hungary during WWII, he learned controlling the media controls the people.
only registered users can see external links
Guys like Ramasmarmy are just jacking up the price of the process.
Just like land speculators, profiting over what should be public capital.
The research and development of new medical treatments is mostly publicly funded, but that is turned into private profits for scammers like Ramasmarmy
and his ilk, who don't contribute anything. It's just socialism for the rich.
I think we agree that we don't want parasites profiting of taxes.
However, your get indoctrinated to think it's the 'obese milkin' welfare',
to distract you that guys like Ramasmarmy make billions of your tax-dollars
and charity donations, without doing anything useful.
It has been exposed for the corrupt person it is.
BUT AOC for example, claims to only been a bartender before getting her position. I would say she probably fucked her way to where she is,She is not hard to look at until she starts talking.
Alot of others are so rich,way to rich to be getting that way off their salary's alone.
They saw her as a political talent and pulled her in.
Lauren Boebert literally was a prostitute!
Greene, I am just glad she is republican and not democrat,they would put her for president!
If it's a white woman who enriches herself through her political position,
who was literally a prostitute, then she has good business sense,
but if it's a woman of Mexican decent, who was identified as a strong debater,
and therefore got offered a political position, then she must be a prostitute,
because, to you, obviously she has no right to be in politics.
Republicans like them crazy, it's their brand now.
Most Democrats like weak losers. Only progressives liked AOC.
Because she is/was a working class fighter for the working class.
Something Republicans masquerade to care about, but always
get unmasked over.
You are so right about the talking part, that just shows the ugly nasty person it is. Remember it whining about not having enough money for rent. I bet there are millions of people that wished they had it's salary and benefits. Poor little thing has to live in poverty. It should resign and go back to being a poor bartender. Yeah, I mean poor, probably did not get many tips spewing it's BS.
The correct gender-neutral pronouns are they/them, thank you.
The only reason you have, to dislike her is that she makes a politician's income?
Why just her? All Democratic politicians make that income too.
And why not Republicans? They are not even satisfied with that income.
That's why they are all using their job to benefit themselves, by taking money from wealthy donors, stock trading with insider information, not abstaining themselves when they vote on laws that benefit their businesses, and blatantly introducing laws purely to benefit themselves.
So, is it just discrimination or also shitting on lower-class people?
It's like I'm listening to stuck-up billionaires, but you're all peasants to them.
Past time to ditch public schools, they don't work,
with their own ideas and don't want them exposed to any other ideas, but their own.
That's a SAFE SPACE! I thought you were against that?
Any parent who thinks that their ideas shouldn't be challenged, probably understands that their ideas are FRAGILE and any REASONING will destroy them.
If just the mentioning of racism and history of black people destroys your racism, than it is WEAK. Have some confidence that your racism will prevail.
If just the idea of gender, sexual identity and sexual orientation makes your kid doubt themselves, then they ARE NOT sis and/or heterosexual, as you want them to be.
They need your guidance to understand themselves, not your stupid oppression
of their feelings.
Sorry (not sorry), education is for the public benefit and it's not to the public benefit to fill the heads of your children with fragile ideas, that don't stand the scrutiny of REASON.
If you want to indoctrinate your children in private education, go ahead, but you're setting them up to fail in any occupation requiring REASON.
Also, private schooling is EXPENSIVE!
The whole idea of public schooling is to provide children from poor parents
with an education, so they can escape the poverty of their parents.
Find me any country that only has private schooling, that works.
They simply want their kids to learn math, english, history, and etc.
The birds and the bee's talk is supposed to be with the father and the son, or the mother and the daughter ,not some man in a dress telling a boy he can get pregnant when a simple medical exam can prove that is not possible.
It's not remotely true.
The 'birds and the bees' is a responsibility of education, because parents suck at doing that and pregnant teens and HIV are damaging to the general public.
Teachers are just providing knowledge, based on current science.
You are anti-knowledge and stuck at 1950's science and BS propaganda.
The less they know at a young age, the less problem.
Don't you think kids would have been taught sex earlier on for many decades had it been a good idea? Their minds are not mature enough to even know what sex is.
Sorry to tell you, but Americans are horrible dumb and getting dumber.
The only way to provide any future for those kids, is compensating for the stupidity of their parents.
There is no age too young to start providing information about sex.
Of course, you keep it at their level and expand on it later.
You cannot teach biology without the 'basics', and biology starts in first grade
in The Netherlands. I read that in the US, biology starts in 8th grade.
I hope that's not true, but damn it would explain a lot.
Most kids learn to use a microscope in primary school these days. In my time, we didn't have them, but we had many classes about anatomy, the brain, cells, species and genes and even evolution, while it was a Christian School.
There was some sexual education too, but it was very prudish. They explained how it was done very shortly and focused on how the sperm fertilizes egg and then grows. Then they very quickly explained how the baby comes out.
I certainly didn't have any problems getting my head around it.
My parents showed a sexual education documentary on TV, when I was around 10 or something. I just remember it being very humiliating and learning absolutely nothing new.
At what age do you think children know how boys and girls are different?
Children discover that as soon as they see a diaper changed in kindergarten.
In my country, parents already explain some basics to their children when they are in the why, why, why phase, when they are 2 or 3. A toddler once told me, with a big smile: 'boys have a tollie, girls have a punani', which is more then I knew, because those are the Surinamese words for penis and vagina. I laughed with her parents, that I just got educated about sex, by a toddler.
Compare your teen pregnancy statistics with ours, and learn something.
The problem is logical reasoning; understanding the cause of problems and understanding reasoning errors and fallacious argumentation. Because of that, Americans believe anything they are told by someone they trust and believe nothing, no matter how solid the arguments, from someone they distrust.
They only have to teach you to trust a specific group of people and then you
trust them and no one else, for life. That makes it very easy to con you.
Understand that the teaching of critical thinking skills is actively opposed,
by people who want you to trust them unconditionally, so they can keep lying
to you and keep taking advantage of you.
Many of the books that DeSantis banned in Florida taught critical thinking skills. Those books didn't contain any CRT or black history or transgender ideology or whatever else you think is woke, they just taught logical reasoning. Nothing is more important to be successful in life, than being able to understand the cause of a problem and think of a logical solution. It's also important to employers, if their employees are able to solve problems. BUT, those logical reasoning skills carry one big risk for the establishment; you will not believe their lies anymore. They cannot have that, so they structure your economy to work with monkeys, who work for peanuts, and reduce education to just teaching you some tricks.
And teachers and the system has lost total sight of what they were intended for .
I think teachers should teach kids how to think and how to learn.
They should also teach kids knowledge as a starting point, to build on,
but learning should never stop after you leave school.
It's impossible to teach kids everything they will need in life,
so you teach them how to learn for themselves what they need after school.
There are 2 sexes or genders, not 24.
But teachers try to teach that there are more and how boys can have babies and shit and the science is not there,the anatomy is not there and so on.
No matter what you learned in school Ananas, I am willing to bet a dozen donuts YOU personally can NOT have a BABY.
All the knowledge in the world,will not put a womb in your torso. Why teach kids that they can do something that is physically impossible?
I am just using that 1 issue as a example , there are more about race and so forth
I was told that and every kid in even the 'wokest' school in my country too.
Only higher education in genetics will expand on the variations in sex.
The teachers who are correct, make a distinction between sex and gender.
Sex is biological and gender is a social/identity construct.
Why is this so hard for you to understand? The scientific definition of 'gender' has never been the same as the scientific definition of 'sex', it was just misused by people who do not know any better. The reason people started using the word 'gender' in stead of 'sex' was prudishness, but that's no reason to confuse science.
I have explained it to you at length, you have not provided anything to the contrary, other than repeating your 1950's ideas and straw-manning the arguments, instead of what scientists have actually demonstrated on the subject.
Oh, also feel free to keep up your bullshit semantics.
Are you kidding? How about too many crimes against humanity to count?
There is only one narrative that I care about; what is true!
There are people who are gay, lesbian, intersex and transgender.
Your side has done nothing but suppresses them and deny those people their very existence. Your side is getting crazy enough to start killing.
And your argument for that is the meaning of a word? That's bullshit!
May be a surprise to you, but not all trans people agree with your BS.
You have just confirmed that trans people exist. Didn't I say:
"There are people who are gay, lesbian, intersex and transgender."?
So how is that BS? What is not true about it?
From every discussion we have had, I get the idea that you are completely incapable of logic. Answer this; if trans people exist, why then is sex binary and why then is 'gender' the same as 'sex'?
How do we categorize transGENDER people, if you are correct?
Lets examine your claim that not all trans people agree agree with me. First of all, that's an 'appeal to authority fallacy', it's not an argument supported by logic. Even if it's true that those people say that, it doesn't say anything about them being correct. They can be just as ignorant of the science as you are. Being transgender doesn't come with a science curriculum in sex and gender studies.
So do those trans people, you are referring to, agree with your view, that they are mentally ill, due to woke propaganda from drag queens, and they shouldn't be allowed to look the way they want to look, take gender-affirming medication and especially not get gender-affirming surgery, because they are obviously confused, because of the 'woke mob'?
Maybe that's putting 'words' in your mouth, but you have called every related opposite idea, that I've proposed 'BS' and worse, so that IS YOUR POSITION. If not, clarify what you don't agree with. If you don't, you confirm everything I just stated.
Ask those trans people, you know, if they agree with that.
If they do, they agree with being stripped of the right to exist.
"There are people who are gay, lesbian, intersex and transgender."?
So how is that BS? What is not true about it? #1 what are the percentage of those people that make you think millions should go along with the BS?
Trans people are about a group of minimum 1% and maximum 5%.
They exist, and they want the right to exist. Is that BS?
What do you consider 'going along with the BS'?
Are you talking about just treating them like human beings?
Is allowing them professional help 'going along with the BS'?
If you are not clear, then how can we have a discussion?
Personally, I think it's BS to make a fully transitioned trans-woman pee at the men's toilet, but you seem to think that is very important. I would feel a bit uncomfortable to find a trans-woman in the men's toilet.
"Did I walk into the wrong toilet?". Not 'going along' with their wish to use the women's toilet, is BS in my opinion.
And I also think women would feel uncomfortable when trans-men have to pee in the women's toilet. Most of them have beards. How is it BS to allow them into the men's toilet? Hell, you wouldn't even notice.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Or things like the right to say 'sir' to someone wearing make-up and a dress. Why would you want that? You're bound to mistake a biological woman for a transvestite or transsexual and look like an idiot. That's why it is BS, in my opinion, to keep saying 'sir' to trans-women.
Do you want to say 'ma'am' to a ripped guy with a beard?
You better know what you're doing then, because if you guess wrong...
Is it BS to let a ripped man, wearing a skirt, compete as a woman?
Yes, of course it is. No one wants that. Lets be honest and practical about it. Stop your BS, saying that's what people want.
How are they put ahead of the majority?
How are YOU hurt by their existence?
They decided to do that as a strategy, because they have nothing else to give you.
They provide you with an enemy, so you think they are doing something for you, when they make that enemy suffer.
Making people suffer doesn't cost anything for the elites,
but it's very useful if people like to see other people suffer.
It's the oldest playbook in politics ever.
It's time people aren't fooled by that anymore.
'Libs' and progressives have logical reasoning.
You have never provided any logical argument for any idea you hold.
The constitution was fixed to give equal rights.
equal rights, means EQUAL EFFORT on the part of all involved.
1 race whining about what was done 100 years ago wants the people of today to give them money for something they are not responsible for and so many other examples .IT's all because of to much tolerance, to much compassion, to much leniency .
if blacks get money for restitution for thier ancestors I want money for my ancestors being forced to walk all the way to Oklahoma
It's not whining over what was done 100 years ago,
they are constantly discriminated against TODAY.
Here are some examples:
When you are just walking around, a cop is not going to think
that you look suspiciously. It is what they get every day and that puts them danger of police violence every day.
Hospitals and schools are taken out of black neighborhoods and polluting industry and highways are put into their neighborhoods.
Their votes get canceled by voter suppression and gerrymandering.
They get racially profiled against getting loans and insurances.
They are stigmatized in the justice system and get harder punishment than white people, for the same crimes.
Not just black people with an equal education make lower wages than white people, but they even make less money with a higher education than white people.
That's called systemic racism and according to the constitution,
that should not happen.
Bella posted a link to a video of a black woman screaming cuss words at a cop, and you have YET to comment on it, Gee I wonder why? Because it disproves your idea that blacks are mistreated? 13% of the population commits 30% or so of all crime
Based on the 2018 NCVS and UCR, black people accounted for 29% of violent-crime offenders and 35% of violent-crime offenders in incidents reported to police, compared to 33% of all persons arrested for violent crimes
Hospitals are not built in black neighborhoods because they can't or don't pay their fucking BILLS. Medical care cost money and they won't work to earn it.
"
"What race has the most medical debt?
Black
And across the middle class, racial disparities persist, with Black and Hispanic families seeing the highest rates. 4 million (37.5%) Black middle-class people have medical debt, 8.5 points higher than Black low-income people and 16 points higher than Black high-income people.Aug 21, 2023"
Please I know I have ask this a dozen times and you or cat neither 1 have shown indisputable evidence that black votes are actually suppressed. You show the potential for it to happen,just as we can show the potential for voter fraud. But you ignore us and try to push your agenda,that has far less actual evidence.
All that is required is a legit id to vote, something everyone has or should have for many other reasons besides voting. The 1 right Americans have that is so simple to qualify for ,being a citizen, and folks are unwilling to prove that simple thing, by having a simple id. SOMEHOW< it is wrong to ask people to prove who the hell they are.
According to liberal theory I should be able to fly over to the Nether regions and vote in YOUR elections. No proof needed to vote right? May I come vote in your next election? You can vote in mine if you swim over the river and give my name if you come to my voting precinct.
So what if they get punished for a crime, it has been going on long enough that everyone,not just blacks ,should know better than to commit crime in the first fucking place.
You are actually not supporting equal reward for equal effort, at all.
Most of the wealthy provides no effort at all, but you think they are entitled to very unequal rewards. They sit behind a desk, thinking of plans to screw their workers, to squeeze even more profits out of their labor and make 400x the money of those workers. How is that equal reward for equal effort?
What did the kids of wealthy people do, to get unequal more access to quality education?
What would that one video tell me? That one cop had the restraint to not kill someone for just disrespecting them?
"13% of the population commits 30% or so of all crime"
One poor black criminal has to do a crime every day to get by.
One white white board criminal can do one crime and make enough to retire.
And that black guy has a much higher chance to get caught and add to the statistics.
Of course poor people have more medical debt than rich people.
I don't need statistics to understand that. BUT THAT IS WRONG!
Healthcare should be a right for everyone and not a thing you need to work for.
Why do you need evidence for voter suppression?
There are laws designed to suppress the votes of black people.
You can READ, don't you?
When Republican politicians draw a map for voting districts to catch every single black person in just one district and then put every white person in all the other districts, that's voter suppression. Are you denying that they do that?
"According to liberal theory I should be able to fly over to the Nether regions and vote in YOUR elections."
Of course not, only everyone living in the Netherlands, who is 18 years or older, and has the Dutch nationality, may vote. Also Dutch people who are in prison. The group of people who are not allowed to vote is very small. You don't have the Dutch nationality, so you would not be allowed to vote, except in some cases for the municipal elections and water board elections.
Everyone who's eligible to vote in my country, gets a voting pass by mail, without any registration needed.
On election day, we go to the polls, handover the voting pass and our identification and we vote, most of the time withing minutes. Our elections are very secure and we don't have any gerrymandering or voter roll purges.
here is a black woman that thinks it is OK to steal.
only registered users can see external links
Another thinks they can cause a accident and not be blamed,
I could go on, but the black people have this "entitlement" mentality and it is just wrong.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Also those that pay should have a say in education of the children, which last time I checked is everyone that pays taxes. Not just the idiot loon dems.
Even if you don't have kids, you are benefiting
from an economy where children get education.
How far do you want to take this? Should people
who don't own cars not pay for road infrastructure?
Should people who don't use public transport not pay for it?
Should people who never visit a park not pay for it?
Should people who recycle pay less for waste disposal
than people who don't recycle? How will you check that?
The system that is required to track all the things
people would pay for and not, would be very expensive.
Libertarian ideas like that are ridiculously impractical.
Parks,put a 10 spot in the can when you walk in,
if you don't ever walk in,then you don't pay,if you don't drive,why the hell would you owe for a road?
It didn't go anywhere, so that's why we invented organized society.
Libertarianism is just chaos. And don't think you support it,
you support a conservative autocratic oligarchy; Trumpism.
You know most of them will argue with a fence post as evidenced by many already. The majorit disagrees with this crap.
I also know a few trans people and they are with me, they say it is just BS the left is using to distract from other things. Maybe bully joey.
The actual people that are dealing with the issues that cause the desire to be trans or whatever, are having issues getting what they need because of all the copy cats and idiots stealing the spot light and resources.
1% or so of the population does not warrant all the screen time it gets.
The only good thing about the uteruses transplants is the rejection rate will be high I am sure and the idiots will have to suffer alot of pain. And maybe,just maybe,they will have to come to terms with the fact they are idiots as they look down at all the scars on their bodies.
I can't see how it is sensible to want to look down and see scars where a dick used to be,or where a boob used to be, the body is destroyed, men with the dick turned to puss deal with infections and such the rest of their lives. when just dealing with the fact you have a dick and living your life would be cheaper, and less harmful healthwise.
It wouldn't be their eggs, but have the DNA of the donor.
At least with a transplanted uterus a person would be able
to bear children which would otherwise be impossible.
Having the ovaries of someone else is totally pointless.
At least with someone else's testicles, you can give cumshots.
That requires a prostate as well, or they would be very dry ones.
Think dude, that would be crazy for me to argue the politics of your Country. Really no one here cares about the politics in your Country. In other words your politics mean nothing.
But there is no school in my country teaching CRT or have kids
'indoctrinated by drag queens'. How does that calculate for you?
Every time some right-wing story comes out, about kitty litter boxes
or some shit, it always turns out to be completely fabricated nonsense.
Or it turns out it's some right-wing parent, who's is trolling people.
Or it is something common sense that schools are obligated to provide, by law.
But it's hyped on every right-wing news outlet, like it's the end times.
It would be crazy for you to discuss politics in my country, because you don't know anything about it. Why should you? What happens in my country doesn't affect you. However, everything that happens in your country affects my country. Just one tiny example: When we had the 'wappies' in my country, denying the very existence of COVID-19 or even the existence of viruses itself, and thinking the vaccines were a government conspiracy to decimate the population, and threatening our politicians over it, that was ALL caused by American made disinformation. I've seen my brother in law turned into a complete lunatic, because of your nonsense. He is not capable of thinking straight anymore. It is ruining his life. He's constantly making horrible mistakes, switching jobs, going into debt, and since recently his 10 year old son doesn't want to live with him anymore, in the weekends. He used to be a sensible, down to earth guy, but American made disinformation turned his mind into mush.
However, I have been following and investigated your political subjects for years now and most of the time I know much more about it than you do. Sure, you live in the US, but you are dependent on the media, to tell you what is happening in schools, just like me. You might hear some stories, but you're only accepting the stories from people in your echo chamber and rejecting the stories your hear from everyone else. They are just crazy liberals to you, so you can ignore them.
You don't know anything about your own country, because you chose to believe bullshit and deny reality.
1 neighbors kid that I spoke to during the plandemic said he was very disappointed about his grades. He was making good grades in school then they closed the schools and went online. He said if you even signed in each day and marked answers on test you were given passing grades rather or not your answers were correct. Schools closed less than 3 months from end of year and with no precedent to follow ,teachers just slacked their way thru.. 1 school teacher explained they are not able to teach history before WW2! Nothing is mentioned about the founding fathers or anything of the sort
But it was necessary to keep the spread of the virus down.
If they had done nothing, the death toll would have been millions higher.
Kids are huge infection spreaders. They don't get very sick themselves,
but they infect everyone around them. The damage done to their education
is still less than when parents are unable to work, end up in hospital,
die or suffer long covid.
Yous hospitals were overburdened. People died due to lack of healthcare,
who wouldn't have died if it was available. One factor that overburdened
your hospitals was people who refused to vaccinate. That had a negative
effect on those children's education too.
However, we were talking about woke and CRT and now we are talking
about covid measure. Maybe that's all the same to you, but it isn't.
the virus,the crt,the "wokeness'. Which I seldom use that term, does not apply to what it is used for
when wise and thoughtful policies serve the public interest.
They tell you 'think about the kids', when they only think about themselves.
Meanwhile they are reducing education to teaching monkeys some tricks.
That's for sure.
Learning there is 514 genders is not any kind of info a person can use to earn a living.
But learning how to keep track of your money,how to invest, how to write, talk, and so on,are some things that need to be taught.
That's more than they taught you, because that won't provide them with a job that pays the rent of a one room apartment these days.
What you think is sufficient education, is just enough for a shop assistant.
If they want to do what I do, and make just enough to buy a house today,
they need to learn real science and learn actual thinking skills.
That was all in the banned books of Ron DeSantis, so sorry for those kids.
Children in the red states will all grow up to be poor or criminals.
Unless they have rich parents of course, they are allowed to learn useful knowledge, because they need it to rule over the poor and dumb peasants.
And no, you're a dumb-ass for thinking there is any specific number of genders or that kids are taught that. They are just hearing that some people feel like they don't belong in the body they were born with, which is a fact, supported by science. But apparently, that information is very dangerous to your ideology. It must be incredibly weak, if you feel so threatened by reality.
The people that are being taught it is ok not to accept themselves as what they are born as in the physical sense is a issue .The suicide rates have not improved since this gender bending thing started.it has gotten worse.
It's bullshit, the percentage of transgenders is completely consistent with historical and researched facts. There are just a whole lot of young people supporting them. Then there are lots of young people who don't like your religiously originated ideology of prudishness and abstinence (as long as it's heterosexual abstinence). Just like punk kids rejected society imposing their idea's onto them, pink haired kids using gender neutral pronouns are rejecting your ideology that you want to impose on them. They are not 'confused' about their sex, they won't go through any surgery, they are just not accepting your outdated ideas and celebrate personal freedom.
Just like when being left-handed was allowed, the percentage of left-handedness increased from 3% to 12% and then stabilized at 12% for
60 years, and the percentage of gay people increased to about 7.5%,
when they are not murdered or imprisoned over it, the percentage of transgenders transitioning or partly transitioning will be at maximum 2% (which is probably too high of an estimation).
only registered users can see external links
If suicide rates have not improved, that's because your ideology
keeps turning their life into a living hell.
US numbers: "Data indicate that 82% of transgender individuals have considered killing themselves and 40% have attempted suicide, with suicidality highest among transgender youth."
I could not find any consistent numbers on the general population, but your suicide rate is 10.1 per 100,000 people per year (ours is 7.9).
Dutch numbers: "Transgender people are 5 to 10 times more likely to attempt suicide and 7 times more likely to think about suicide compared to non-transgender people."
About 4.3% of the Dutch population considers suicide at one time in their lives. That means it's 30% for transgender people.
The conclusions:
1) It sucks to be a transgender, in general.
2) Life in the US generally sucks more than life in The Netherlands.
3) For transgender people life sucks way more in the US, than life
in The Netherlands.
If you can convince fat people they are pretty,you should be able do similar for trans people.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
person admits the hate comes from within!
only registered users can see external links
The meds these people are taking are not working,or they need some meds.
DUH@
Just as the 1 link mentioned, i can't qoute it but , when blacks stop acting the stereo type, it won't be used anymore.
This is understandable, because you agree with cops and old white idiots
killing any black person who looks suspicious.
'Don't look suspicious' is not a solution, because all black people
look suspicious to you, all the time, because of their skin color.
You are pointing to statistics for that, but we can do that for you too.
Terror attacks are committed by right-wing extremists in the large majority of cases,
in 2020 more than 90%. If police spot an armed white man, with a MAGA hat,
in the vicinity of a school, by your logic, they should assume he's a school shooter,
and shoot him dead, before he can kill any children. He fits the stereotype.
only registered users can see external links
You only support that lethal 'law enforcement' against black people and not against white people. Should the capital guards have shot more jan 6th rioters? They even attacked, wounded and killed guards, not just stole some nice unprotected loot.
Just have a security guard or two around, who tackle at least two of them and hand them over to the police. There were nine looters there and they did not even get one of them. There were no security gates and no alarms (in my country, even the discount stores have security gates). That's incompetence. It's choosing crime over security expenses.
If there's 0% chance of getting caught looting, there will always be people who choose to loot. Catching at least two of them, would have increased to risk of that heist to 22%. That turns the risk/reward percentage to not worth the crime.
it used to be equality that folks were after, a logical goal.
Now it is equity. Which is unattainable without taking from those that have achieved and giving to those that can't or wont strive to achieve.
A unfair and unrealistic goal that will only creates hatred and division.
Look at what the idiots are doing now. What is it up to now 91 indictments, sorry, I lost count.
how is it 'division' to indict a president who at least committed 91 crimes?
The reality is that black lives MATTER LESS or often not at all.
By denying that, you are denying that 'all lives matter'.
I have yet to see any argument from any right-winger
that shows how they really think that 'all lives matter'.
You are always saying it, but all your ideas come down to
that 'NO lives matter'. Except your own, but often not even your own.
The fact that "BLACK" is put in front of lives is the issue.
That prompts the reader to think the statement is in reference to a black life being more important.
No color or race should be put in front of "lives matter" ,if the person or group is trying to get folks to value life.
It is all meant to create division and hatred ,nothing less, nothing more. and it has worked.
But it will work out ok in the end. As NO lives will matter and AI will take care of the worlds issues in a organized and logical manner.
That's because you cannot think yourself, beyond what you hear.
You are whining about a slogan, they are demanding to not be killed.
Your fifis are hurt, they see innocent family members getting killed by police.
Maybe they are dividing people with that slogan, but they have a right to,
because you have divided them, from the rest of Americans, for ever.
They should not have to include you, in front of 'lives matter',
because you are responsible yourself for how much your lives matter.
You are in power of the system that harms (all) people, they are not.
You think you are the only one, who is allowed to divide people. You're not!
They should not give a fuck about what you think, because you are harming them. They are in the right, to fight your ideas, until YOU stop your thinking and YOU close that division. They have asked nicely for decades and they are done with that.
Fix your racist police and fix your racist system, or they will never stop protesting,
no matter how much you think it is creating division and hatred.
Same as they should be.
If they obeyed the damn law, the police would not be in contact with them much at all.
I know it is a slogan in reference to police, but it is divisive and no ones opinion will change that.
Ok so they are tired of being nice eh?
Well, So are the rest of us.
You haven't saw the recent videos of the snatch and grab robberies in california?
No respect for private property,no respect for the law, nothing.Has been that way for years, and they want US as in the rest of the races of the world, to change OUR MINDSET FIRST? forget it, it is a 2 way street,until THEY make a effort to improve, we shouldn't have to either.
only registered users can see external links
People who are making billions a year, are telling people who make $40,000 a year, that people who make $10,000 a year, are stealing their crumbs.
Or they just distract you with culture war bullshit.
You'll give up EVERYTHING for the 'right' to be an asshole to a transvestite.
And you are gobbling up that shit and voting for people who keep telling that shit,
while you are probably one of the people most affected by that shit.
You will vote for the people who will destroy Medicare, that you will need.
NO, a person that wants to commit violence will do so on their own accord.
Black supremist ,a new term I just heard here.
only registered users can see external links
Marine, Pfc. Dan Bullock, of Brooklyn, NY. went in at age 14, died at age 15.
How many black men volunteer for the military today?
only registered users can see external links
Black Panthers Protesting In Washington D.C.
In 1969 the Black Panther Party, a group of revolutionary African Americans, came out of Oakland, California to peacefully protest the United States' involvement in the Vietnam War. Aside from simply protesting the war, the Panthers were able to institute free breakfast for students in every city where they had a chapter, and they gave out free shoes to the poor.
When the Panthers marched on Washington D.C. in 1969 it became one of the largest peaceful protests to ever hit America. Despite the peaceful protest, the FBI considered the Panthers public enemy #1. Ideals of empowerment and resistance have persisted, but enthusiasm for the Black Panther party itself waned.
Now tell me, does the black panthers still give out shoes to the poor?
It took me just one minute to find these statistics. Seeing that 13.6% of Americans are black, they are overrepresented in your military. White Americans are underrepresented.
The Black Panthers were not a charity organization. Their full name is The Black Panther Party for Self-Defense (BPP). It was a revolutionary organization with an ideology of Black nationalism, socialism, and armed self-defense, particularly against police brutality.
As far as I can find, they don't exist anymore.
There are still many 'black charities' though. Here are some of them:
only registered users can see external links
How did phart find his information?
How do you find something on the internet?
Google? Yahoo? DuckDuckGo? Ecosia (prabably not
--------------------------------------- added after 5 minutes
They go by the name of the new black panther party and they are very much involved with the BLM movement
only registered users can see external links
Stay strong brothers & sisters!
--------------------------------------- added after 7 minutes
That’s some thing that interests me in my quest to find out why the blacks hate whites so much i don’t hate them i just hate the way they act with their boom box music and their jive talk and their walking around with a comb in their hair and pants down around their ass I have a friend that is black and he was adopted and raised by a well off white couple he’s one of the nicest people you would ever meet we still go fishing together to this day
like generalizing them all in they way you describe them,
unless they were raised by white people, of course.
They should not respect you, for treating them as human beings,
after you used their ancestors as cattle, for hundreds of years.
Think of this: You'll work for me, do the worst jobs I can find for you, while you'll only get to eat my scraps and live in my shed. When you won't work hard enough, I'll whip you to submission. After a few decades, the government says that I'll have to stop. They'll pay me money to compensate for my loss. You'll be free to go, in a country where everyone hates you. Your final moments are hanging on a burning cross.
I'm sure you'll think back of me, with respect, in your last moments.
My father shot your father in the head, because he was worn out, after 30 years of hard unpaid labor. Your grandfather died from his wounds, when my grandfather whipped him for disobedience, after 25 years of hard unpaid labor.
Will your grandchildren respect my grandchildren, for not doing that anymore?
because you haven't learned anything.
You still don't see them as human beings.
And if your side would legalize slavery again,
or something similar, you would probably support it.
And they don't tax rich people, when your side wins. They'll just tax YOU.
I have yet to get a straight answer from anyone on that question.
Most of them have only known their enslavement, and died as a slave.
Had the US not enslaved the ancestors of the black people living in the US,
they would either have been born in the countries that those slaves were taken from or they would have been immigrants. The US still needed lots of workers and could have asked people to come work in the US, just like how so many Chinese people ended up in the US.
I seriously doubt they would be drinking starbucks and driving lexus.
maybe even more generations than your ancestors.
You see them as 'blacks', but they are Americans.
They are Americans with a tough past, because of white man's evil
and they are still struggling because of that past en what still remains of it.
Africa isn't doing very well, maybe because of the same reason;
interference from the western world. If we hadn't enslaved and subjugated their countries, they could have all been drinking Starbucks and driving a Lexus there now too, but we keep messing up their ability to do so.
It's also fun to see how your stories flip, for the points you want to make;
for one narrative, they are all poverty stricken drugs dealers
and for another narrative they are drinking Starbucks and driving a Lexus.
No they didn't kill him,but I bet he will think twice before he steals again. I love this method of dealing with theft. no law enforcement needed, just beat the fuck out of em and kick them out the door.Problem solved.
I am sure leo will think they should help him pile more in the can so it will be worth his time.he seems to support crime
only registered users can see external links
I say more of this need to be done. Notice also,no white guys involved.
Even blacks and others are getting tired of the shit.
You only get one. Would be a shame to waste it.
I figure that was my “one and only reason” to “carry”. I don’t want to be a hypocrite. Owning a gun and advocating against them is not right.
Well, if guns solved everything, that would be easy.
Looking at your country, it doesn't look like guns solve everything.
Actually, it looks like guns solve nothing, except for 'ascending early'.
I see no reason to believe that 'ascending' is real. When the brain dies, it's over.
Still being kind to other people is the way to go, to make the world better,
where we spend our one and only life.
If I would live in an area with bears and mountain lions, I would want to be armed. That's not the problem in your country, it's the people who think they need to be able to protect themselves in villages and cities, where the only danger comes from other people.
Allowing people to protect themselves from other people is also providing everyone with the most effective tools to kill other people. Maybe you wouldn't hurt a human unless they had it coming, but, isn't it clear that many people do hurt other people, who not have it coming?
And what does 'unless they had it coming' mean? Does it mean them ringing your doorbell at 10 pm? Maybe you are responsible enough to own a gun, but many of your countrymen don't. They might think you have it coming, when you keep stinking up the laundry, hanging outside in the neighbors garden, with your BBQ smoke. Or maybe they think you have it coming, when you cut someone off in your car accidentally. Arming everyone means arming crazy people. And I don't see your government do anything to restrict guns from crazy people or improve mental healthcare.
You don't have to fear death, but you're certainly at risk of it. Being a a good man who does unto others as you would like them to do unto you, is no guarantee against that. I remind you of how many innocent children get gunned down in your country. That doesn't happen anywhere else in the world like that.
"When people don't believe in heaven or hell, then that's what you have today."
Reality doesn't change according to your beliefs. Heaven and/or hell are either real or not. Do you care about your beliefs being consistent with reality, or would you prefer to believe in something that's not true, just for it giving you comfort?
I experienced full anesthesia several times. That felt like not existing, during that period. It would feel the same to be dead; nothing.
I can be wrong, but I'm not seeing any good arguments for why I should be.
I'm not going to live my life, believing something that I find illogical.
"float around in cyberspace forever" No thanks! First of all, I don't believe that would be me, but just a copy of me. Second; forever is too long a time for me. Everything will get very boring, before forever gets even close.
If I can add another 100 years to my life in health and strength, that would be very attractive. However, since humanity is doing its best to destroy the world,
I don't know If I would want to see so much of the future or even if all the rest of my life, that I hope to have, is going to be that pleasant.
I still have both my parents, but they are getting old. I will miss them a lot,
when they'll eventually leave me. I'm sure your beliefs could help that make more bearable, but solace is not a reason for me, to have any beliefs.
I'm sure many things will help me remember them. That's good enough.
My father and I share a little joke; whenever you do something good, you get a voucher for the canteen in heaven. I'm sure I will imagine him spending his vouchers, even though I don't believe in it.
Then what?
I vaguely remember reading or hearing the greeks idea of hell was a person spending eternity doing something he could never finish.Like rolling a rock up a hill and get it almost to the top and it rolls back down.that sort of thing.I sure hope I don't spend eternity trying to get my shoes tied!
That's the issue when you don't have public broadcasting, which is obligated to inform the public about political candidates.
--------------
A gun damn sure keeps unwanted people off my property.
Have you ever really thought about that concept?
How ever nice that 'life after death' would be, I would get bored eventually.
I actually prefer it all to end, just after a good and long life.
But, what I prefer is not an argument for what is real.
Consciousness is dependent on a functioning brain. Chemicals can change or stop your consciousness. Getting brain damaged makes people unable to perform thinking tasks that functioning brains can do, like recognizing shapes, or faces, or sounds, or retain memories. Those facts eliminate the concept of a soul. Have you ever been under full anesthesia? That part that you cannot remember, that's how it would feel to be death. How you felt 100 years ago, is exactly how you would feel in 100 years; nothingness.
It's a very simple concept to me. It's only a difficult concept for people who were indoctrinated with religious ideas. The concept of an afterlife or some form of consciousness after death is not based on experiences or reasoning.
Any idea how it would feel to be a cosmic like entity comprised of all the essence? Can you still think, see, feel, move and communicate? What is the benefit of being such an entity? Is there still a purpose into being, at that point? Why is it better than not 'being' at all?
Heaven and hell are just human creations to make people compliant.
Considering that my body will be cremated, unless they will think of something more environmentally friendly for me to choose, all my atoms will return to the proverbial soup as well.
I see our essence as data on computer memory. When the hardware is destroyed, the data is truly wasted. However, I can store some of those memories on the people around me and on society. And the impact I had on society will always remain, even if everyone who ever knew me is gone too.
I don't think much of me will remain, when humanity is destroyed.
I think that's the source of me caring about what happens to humanity,
after I'm gone.
Except, for my brother having a son as progeny, we don't have that.
It was a conscious choice not to have children. Still, I care more about the future of humanity, than most people who do have children.
Even the majority of Americans accept the consequences of what climate science has presented. So either people are being ostriches or they think it's inevitable (it's not). Why are people not demanding from their politicians to stop following the road to oblivion? What we are leaving behind now, is the debt of not having done enough. Our generations will be remembered for the misery of future generations, for as many as there still will be.
We are being selfish, by using up all the natural resources and destroying all of nature. We are leaving progeny with a dying earth, with nothing on it, but toxic and nuclear waste.
If there's a creator, would he like the people who are destroying his creation?
I don't believe in a soul, but I still prefer to keep my conscience clean.
Strange how some of the strongest believers are strong supporters of selfishness and not giving a fuck about destroying the earth.
Not having a BBQ party is not going to save the climate.
71% of the problem is caused by 100 companies.
Not even you or I being fully 'green' from tomorrow on, will help anything.
No one can solve this problem with personal choices.
Unless all the powerful people are making the right choices,
it's up to the 'good' people to make them make the right choices.
Telling us today to use a solar panel may bite us in the ass in 30 years when ,material from solar panels has been shown to cause cancer or something along that line for example.
I posted this elsewhere but this is a prime example of Everyone being told how good something they were doing was,only to find out it was a hoax. Big time.
I'm talking about getting an economical car or conserving water or not littering.
This shouldn't keep you from trying to do the right thing.
There is however a difference between your tire story and solar panels.
The tires were claimed to be intended to build sea life reefs. How much of a NECESSITY was that? And how much did it save money, by just throwing old tires in the ocean?
Climate change is real, whether you chose to believe it or not. The only remedy is to strongly reduce our carbon emissions. Using the power of the sun, as an alternative to using fossil fuels, is the best option, to keep powering our current way of living, without killing nature and ourselves. That's something that justifies us taking more risks,
than when we decide what we do with old tires. Sea life reefs
are now dying in record pace, because of sea temperatures
comparable to a hot tub. Some old tires are not going to help.
only registered users can see external links
These are just some dumb motherfuckers, that's all you can make of it.
Long video but worth a watch,I had never heard about this
only registered users can see external links
I wonder if I write "white" down on my ticket in the morning if the ladies will say anything?
only registered users can see external links
What the fuck does he need with a tractor?
--------------------------------------- added after 2 minutes
They're funny. Have you listened to Jesse Lee Peterson? He makes me laugh but the man's a genius.
Do you realize that IF californicated was able to pay out say a million dollars to each black person, how bad that would be for the local and eventually the national economy?
The dollar wouldn't be worth 7 cents!
How could it go thru the roof?
All those black people would run to the car dealer and buy a fancy car,the car inventory would go to 0, and the remaining cars would sky rocket in value,
thus, the dollar worth less.
They would all buy a fancy house,building materials thru the roof,shortages, and by the way,there would be a labor shortage as you know none of them would work.
just all kinds of problems.
only registered users can see external links
Some figures say 350,000 dollars, who knows, but if at all,is only deserved by those that can PROVE they are decendants of slaves,not all blacks are.
--------------------------------------- added after 11 minutes
Do you think the state will need illegal aliens to fill positions in the hospitality. Food, and agricultural sectors?
And just where would this money come from? And just why is it only california blacks can have it? And will Transracial people be able to get it?
The promise did not indicate where the land would be,or how old and healthy the mule would be,so any land will do,and mule will do.
--------------------------------------- added after 54 seconds
And what if they want a dog instead of a mule?
--------------------------------------- added after 2 minutes
Or, what if they want Okra and chitlins?
The promise was not a dog, it was a mule, with the idea of the people using it to work a FARM.
They can grow okra and pigs on their 40 acres.
Again,just expecting the people to do something for themselves instead of being bums.
And who is going to pay for all the research needed to prove who is a descendant of slaves and who aint? Very few in california actually qualify more than likely.
40 years married,this is interesting reading,
"Jackson met his wife when the two attended Morehouse College. The two have been together for over 40 years (per People)."In the beginning, we always said the most revolutionary thing that Black people could do was stay together, raise their children with the nucleus of having a father and a mother, since everybody likes to pretend that that's not the dynamic of the African American family. That it's just children out here being raised by women, which we know is false," LaTanya said. "In order to change that narrative, we made a decision to say, 'We are going to stay together no matter what. We'll figure it out.'" The pair have even worked together, with LaTanya acting as a producer on Samuel’s projects (and earning her own salary on them).
That is racist.
Look what defund the police did!
As far as BLM, did they take your money under false pretenses? It sure seems that way as you worry so much about their financial operations.
You see, it can be done.
""It is an honor and privilege to be accepted to the Ivy League Cornell University’s College of Engineering in Ithaca, N.Y.," he added.
But I am willing to bet the average black person will start calling this guy a uncle tom if he comes out of college having freed himself of the victim mentality, that the blacks have been indoctrinated with for so long.
If black lives matter,why do so many more die from gun violence under the age of 18 than all other races combined?
Black lives don't even matter to the black people,
1 black person says their lives matter while the 1 next to them is killing another black person. They don't even value their own lives.
But yet,they expect whites and others, to value theirs.
Whites are developing this same lack of love for life as well.
Black or white, is this right? That is the point. Not the BLM or the QAnon, or whatever has a lock on THE MAJORITY of people, black or white, that go through everyday life trying to live a peaceful and fruitful life.
_____________________________
I did not form the BLM lunacy, libtards did to keep everyone occupied while they do more goofy shit.
I wonder how far I could get with that idea today?
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
I wonder why we didn't learn about this man in school?
He wouldn't get far in the US, owning (white) slaves now, because slavery is prohibited.
He could just exploit his workers (legal or illegal) and make them fully dependent on him, by setting up a company in a poor area and bribe some local politicians to look the other way. It would be just as cheap as using slaves, without the hassle.
Slaves are hard to come by and when you don't feed them enough or punish them too hard for not working hard enough, they die. Especially illegal immigrants are an inexhaustible resource, which companies can exploit to death, with impunity, because Republicans don't believe in punishing companies and just blame the immigrants themselves and the Democrats for letting them in, while distracting their voters with a border wall and neglecting to mention that they will never close the gate for letting in the illegals going to their exploiters.
But it would become easier for an Anthony Johnson to exploit white Americans,
like slaves, if you keep supporting Republicans stripping even more rights and benefits for working, poor and unemployed people.
There are lots of 'right to work' states that already make is easy to abuse (white) Americans, but cheaper and without the hassle of owning slaves.
DREAMers got a chance to study and work in the US. That's not a carrot, that's actually improving their life, even if they have to return to their country of origin. They are not exploited. They are not working on a farm or as a roofer or in a meatpacking plant. And even if they would need to return to their country of origin, their chance to make it there would also massively increase.
It's bullshit Democrats don't deal with illegal immigration.
They are doing border security just as much, but they also provide a path to citizenship for real refugees and immigrants who have a chance to improve their lives in the US and would benefit the US in return. That's not exploitation, because they will no longer be illegals. They will become Americans and have a better life than would have been possible in their country of origin.
Your problem is that you think of any immigrant as an 'illegal'.
That's why your brain starts producing errors.
It's just a name. Just like 'Advance America', is a name
for a conservative political advocacy group. I don't think any
conservative political advocacy group will ever 'Advance America',
I think conservatives are against any and all advancement.
If you hear me blabber on daily about their name and nothing more,
would you think I am a serious person, with valid points?
You know what the BLM moment is about; police violence.
A movement needs a name, and they came up with this one.
Could they think of any name that you would not BS about?
You keep arguing 'why are they angry that police kill them,
when criminals also kill them'. Maybe you don't understand
how stupid that argument is, but I'm sure some get it.
Of course they don't like it that criminals kill them,
but those are CRIMINALS. But the POLICE SHOULDN'T!!
Why should the police be the last to be expected not to kill people?
Blm, black lives matter ,does not even sound like it is linked to anything police.
If the black people LEGITAMENTLY are concerned about police killing them as they commit crimes they should have come up with a name related to the subject.
I say let them defund the police and make them move there. Hey, if they want to create a cess pool then make them live in it.
"Why is it only Mothers who care about drunk driving?
Do fathers not care about children being killed by drunks?"
That's what your doing with the name BLM.
You're probably just angry that they think any lives matter at all,
if even children's lives don't matter enough, to do something.
________________________________
Oh, forgot unless you are a dumb socialist and condone in breaking the law. Yes, face it. Socialism fails because of people like you.
that's a thing in any American organization. Guess what percentage of donations for building 'the wall' actually goes to building it.
And they could have thought up a better name as well.
But you can only come up with dumb critique on things like that.
That's a new one, that I condone breaking the law. Since when?
You condone treason, corruption, ra.pe and white board crime, for Trump.
Strange, how you say that socialism fails, when you also say that Democrats and all European countries are socialist. That sounds like you actually think that socialism is beating right-wing ass all day.
I don't know of a group of fathers against drunk driving.
Do you?
Prohibition, I wish it had worked out,
So that name is not accurate, it should be Parents Against Drunk Driving.
And if I was you, and didn't like what MADD stood for,
I would go on and on and on, about the name, just like you.
But I don't, because I don't care about the name of an organization,
I care what an organization stands for. I care about real issues.
I think of blacks taking care of their kids, not killing each other.Men not calling their women bitches and hoes. that sorta thing.
They feel that their lives don't matter to cops, because they are black.
You would be right to say the name was provocative, probably intentional.
They don't want or need your approval of their name, because you will never be their ally. Their name has served them well, because your outrage over their name only encourages the people who support the movement and its message.
I see no evidence for BLM being more corrupt than what's standard in the US.
It's not transparent enough, for my likes, but we are talking about an organization worth around $40 million. There are a shitload of right-wing, conservative and religious organizations worth billions, that are less transparent than BLM.
only registered users can see external links
There are questions as to WHO wrote it but it makes alot of sense.
You,Phart, may not realize it but this is racist. He's saying that because African Americans have roots in slavery, they will never be "equal to the white man".
And show me exactly what is racist about stateing the obvious.
Sadly the black people were taken from their homeland and brought here with out education, and once free, had no trades,no way of supporting themselves except the jobs they had already done as slaves. Now generations later, with the 14 th amendment, and many other legal measures,are they equal yet?
Are they? and if not considered equal,by who's fault?
25 seconds, never looked at it this way before.
at least watch most of it to get the point of the video
Just being nice to people you meet, makes both your days a little bit better.
What was it that never looked at this way before?
What was the point of the video according to you?
Amazing. Instead of demanding things ,burning things, stealing things ,harming others, he worked a good job for a living and treated his customers well. And they remembered it.
Instead of idolizing crooks and rappers and ball players ,why can't the black people look at men like this as a positive example and follow it? That is most of my point.
I had never looked it this way but i get delivery's and the ups man is similar in the way he works. I tend to trust him more than others because of his actions but in the big picture i had not thought about it the way this video presented it
It's actually ridiculous that some white people are surprised when a black man is just being nice to customers. That's a normal thing. Maybe they are not nice to people that show their hate and fear, the moment they ring the doorbell. Maybe Buddy Brown's family was a bit different, didn't show immediate distrust and contempt, and treated Robert like an actual person. Friendliness is answered with friendliness and that's how you build relationships.
It's even more ridiculous that you think he's an exception and the rest are all 'demanding things ,burning things, stealing things, harming others'. You just accused me of racism, when I said something about Candice Owens, one specific black person, but you think it's not racism, when you say being nice is an exception from the rule of black people 'demanding things ,burning things, stealing things, harming others'.
Read the definition of 'racism' and tell me how that makes any sense.
Candice Owens is a cunt and a grifter for white racists, and saying that is not racism, just because she's black. Saying black people, in general, are 'demanding things, burning things, stealing things, harming others', that's racist.
"Instead of idolizing crooks and rappers and ball players ,why can't the black people look at men like this as a positive example and follow it?" (also racist)
The large majority of black people are exactly like Robert, just trying to keep their heads above water, making long hours and not making a lot of money,
just like the majority of white Americans, but paid on average 30% less.
Being a FedEx employee is not 'working a good job for a living'.
A FedEx delivery driver makes between $11 - $26, and on average: $17.
An average of $17/hour is $35,360 annually. Just enough for rent and food.
How can he pay for a decent education for his kids?
And then he got shot, in a rough neighborhood, just sitting in his truck.
Probably his own neighborhood, when making $35,360 annually.
Maybe by a cop, who wanted to know why he was sitting there, and Robert made
'one wrong move', which was just getting his license and registration out of the
glove compartment. Because, many black people die like that.
Buddy didn't tell us how Robert died. Would he have told us, if a cop shot Robert?
17 a hour ,damn, that is way more than I ever made on the job,and I kept my bills paid.
Sure,I don't drive a Maserati but but I didn't do without needs.
You budget your "needs" with your primary income, then work side jobs for the "wants".
Due to our marketing and such in the US, everyone is mindcontrolled into thinking they have to have a Iphone 17 2 days before it comes out into the market.they have to wear the latest styles in shirt and shoes,400$+ nike tennis shoes.
When common sense tells you to go the Salvation army and get last months styles in like new condition for a 10th of the price,and a 40 dollar pair of shoes is plenty.
By the way, salary is just 1 aspect, look at the PAID HOLIDAYS< up 3 weeks vacation soon after start,etc
Health coverage!Salary is only a small part of a jobs benefits, IF you work at a good company
only registered users can see external links
$17/hr is not great. It barely pays the bills and leaves very little, if any, for a college education. I’d say you’ve settled with what your circumstances brought you. That’s not what most people want.
Stop whining about the overtime and work it, put the extra in savings. Take a second job instead of playing video games all day on sunday, do SOMETHING yourself to improve your situation instead of holding your hand out and whining like a little baby You just might get nothing but some cheese to go with your whine.
Or what about this guy?
only registered users can see external links
He owned 63 people.A black man OWNED 63 people? why don't we hear about this guy during black history month?????
here is some info
only registered users can see external links
At least she picked a name that fits the movie like a glove.
A black person that speaks words out of rhythm from the rest may NOT be a grifter. They could have actually USED the education they were GIVEN to study ,and understand where the real problems are.
But it's racist to call her out on that, because she's black?
Racist means judging one person on generalization about their race.
I'm judging her on her own behavior, not on generalization about her race.
You are judging a 16 year old black boy, that you don't know,
by generalization about his race. That's racism!
only registered users can see external links
Most of my in-laws are discriminating to a varying degree.
And now my dad is 80 years old and declining mentally a bit more,
I hear him say pretty racist things sometimes, that he never said before.
I think it is associated with fear. People get more fearful when they get older,
but lots of people buy in to the constant fear-mongering too. And sorry to tell you,
but that fear-mongering is very fucking prevalent in the US.
You're legal system punishes way harder than mine.
That means I would have much more reason to be afraid.
The word fear is misused alot in these situations.
If the world worked like the Leo's think it should , there would be no fire trucks because fire would be illegal and if lightning struck a dog house, the entire city would go up in flames while the citizens roasted marshmallows.
But if the risks of the world are keeping you from living, that's fear.
Even if we had no emotions at all, it would still be preferable to have a fire department, to reduce destruction, suffering and waste.
I know the world is changing and not for the better. I don't fear that.
I try to change it for the better and prepare for the worst, with moderation.
I won't let that control my life, because I understand that I can only play a minuscule part in it. I still have a responsibility as a human being to do what I can, but as a human I also have a right to live my only life well on this earth. It's a balance.
That's still better than being ignorant on purpose and being selfish by default.
I know you believe in responsibility, because you hate lazy people.
But laziness is not just being unwilling to work.
Being unwilling to think and care is also laziness.
only registered users can see external links
B lank
L ooks
M atter!
Have the people found world peace now that Aunt Jemima is no longer on the syrup bottle?
Has any one noticed any positive changes now that the Indian girl is gone from Land O lakes butter?
what did all that commotion accomplish in the long term?
To me,it just indicates how industry caves to pressure from people with nothing better to do that fuss and complain about things that are harming no 1.
OH and did you notice the factory the Jeep Cherokee was built in has closed DOWN? Possible no More Cherokee's? All because of a few grouchy Indians. Hell, now who will even think about the Cherakee that the name is not out there at ALL? Erasing themselves from the world.
We used to have the 'moorkop', translation; 'moor head'.
(The term Moor, derived from the ancient Mauri, is an exonym first used by Christian Europeans to designate the Muslim inhabitants of the Maghreb, the Iberian Peninsula, Sicily and Malta during the Middle Ages.)
They are not gone, they are just called 'Bossche bollen' or 'chocoladesoezen' now.
only registered users can see external links
And we used to have 'negerzoenen', translation; 'nigro kisses'.
They are called 'Buys Zoenen' now.
only registered users can see external links
I even had to search for the old name of 'moorkop', because I forgot.
We still have 'jodekoeken' (Jew cakes). let's clench to the bigotry they still allow us.
I'm sure a black guy would be allowed to register the brand 'Cracker-Crackers', right?
If you think people's life is affected more from some products getting a new name,
than from e.g. abortion being banned, you really have a screw loose.
'Uncle Ben' clearly refers to the history of black people being slaves.
That's not 'black heritage', funny guy, that's a reminder or even a celebration of their enslavement. Their real 'heritage' has been taken away from them by force.
But you obviously decide for them what their 'heritage' is, so why would they have any voice in the matter?
Do you think black people would complain if you wanted to change the name of 'Redneck Relish'? If you don't like that 'heritage', you are free to have it changed.
But other than that example, I see not many products referring to the whiteness of white people or to the horrible poverty of white workers in history. Are Sugar Glazed Doughnuts being called 'White Chicks', because they are white and have a hole? Then, why think of a Muslim's head, when there is a chocolate pastry on your plate? When 'they' changed it, I just thought: 'OK that's fair.'.
In any case, it's just big corporations deciding to change their branding, because it makes them look bad. If they decided that changing the brand name would hurt them, no number of letters from black people would ever persuade them to change it.
I made a joke saying that 'THEY still allow us', but there is no government deciding that companies need to change the names of the products. It's just public pressure from consumers. You can call that 'woke', but I call it just a tiny sign of progress.
It doesn't help anyone, but at least it shows some awareness.
Birth control is next on the chopping block. It's not about 'saving unborn babies', it's about control. If your side wanted to save babies, there are better ways. Making abortion illegal doesn't actually reduce the number of abortions. It only creates more abortion across borders and illegal abortions. Woman who cannot afford to be pregnant, the hospital costs or caring for a child, are not suddenly able to afford it, when you eliminate abortion legally. You just turn them into victims and apparently you prefer to turn them into criminals too. How about reducing the actual reason for abortion; poverty and people needing to work more and more to keep themselves afloat. Did you know that parents in the US rate their quality of life much lower than childless people? In many other modern countries that's the other way around.
Those countries have less working hours and better childcare. Just saying.
Childless people can put that money towards a better home,car,retirement.
In all the typing you do ,you never mention PREVENTION of child birth by acting responsibly.
That cost NOTHING .And has no negative affect on quality of life.
--------------------------------------- added after 93 seconds
And you, Tecsan, what's with the thumb up? Are you so jaded too?👿
Less important, but still important for me, is what it means to society and the world to create this extra person.
For most people it's a choice. And that choice is made while considering many factors, like 'Would I be a good parent?', 'Do we have a stable relationship?', 'Is there a genetic disorder in our families?', 'Is it fair to a kid, to put them into this fucked-up world?', 'Do we have room in our house for a kid?', 'Can we afford a kid?', 'Can I get through those nights of interrupted sleep?', 'Who takes care of the kid, when we both need to go to work?', etc..
We made the decision to not have kids. There are some regrets, but not enough to regret the decision. We are happy the way we are.
Kids now throw the parents in the rest home at the first chance they get ,sell off everything and disappear.
Only good thing, hopefully their kids will do the same so they can rot in the nursing home and think, "damn I put mom and dad thru this" and die with a guilt conscience.
One of my most precious memories was when my daughter, 7 at the time, was in a first grade play singing Quack Quack Waddle Waddle. Or, when my Dad died, my youngest son held his hand telling him how much he loved him. Or when my oldest broght me a daisy for my birthday because " he didn't have enough for a rose".
Yes, we did spent sleepless nights and terrifying days when they ended in the hospital for some reason or another. Or how we had to give up a vacation because one of them needed the money for some field trip to Disney with their class. My first son caught us unawares. He wasn't planned and we didn't have insurance. The delivery surgeon demanded all money up front. We decided to have the other two, why? Because they are such a joy nothing compares to it.
People make decisions in life because of many reasons. There are valid reasons not to have children. Your reasons don't cut it.
Now, a personal belief and I don't expect agreement on this. A woman that goes through life without giving birth at least one time is a terrible waste of a woman.
On the one hand, children are expensive, so they diminish the ability to spend money on luxuries and other quality of life expenses.
On the other hand, children are an enrichment of your life (non-financial).
That creates a balance of perceived happiness. It's not all about the money.
On average most Americans perceive that balance as negative, while people in other modern countries perceive that balance as positive. That is the result of very large studies.
So why is that? Do Americans care more about money than children, than people in other modern countries? Or are Americans just poorer, so children affect their ability to afford luxuries more, than people in other modern countries?
Or is it just way harder to have children in America than in other modern countries?
It can only be either of those three options. But logic suggests it's probably the third, because American parents get almost no support from their government, while people in other modern countries do.
Eh? balance? I doubt it.
I have sadly watched the very opposite of happiness brought on to parents by their kids.my former girlfriends brother is a fine example of the opposite. Since he was 12 ,he has been a fire bug, since 14 a dope head, and has been in and out of rehab and hospitals for many years. He is in his 40's now and in prison. Some happiness and continuation of family he brought. No fault of the parents, they tried their damnest ,the punk is no good and waste of good air.
I do not have the patience to be a parent. Discipline is impossible now. I can't handle screaming children, keep quite. When in a restaurant, you eat, not scream and squirm and throw shit.But what few parents even flinch when that happens, liberal parents go hating on them for not allowing the child to exspress it's self. Just crazy shit.
I'm sure some kids are just born broken, but for the most part horrible children just seem to born, by great coincidence, with horrible parents.
Whatever parenting strategy you use, that liberal approach with freedom, love and patience or that conservative tough love with discipline, I'm sure you agree that it takes TIME. If both parents need to work full-time, to provide a home and food, what time do they have left for parenting? Do you think it matters that they can do more than just feed them and put them to bed in the evening?
I'm sure you do, because you think women need to be at home to raise kids.
Well, sorry, but your broken economy provides wages to about half the American families, that are too low for just father to go to work and mother to stay at home.
It could be fixed with free or cheap childcare, so hopefully they can raise those kids to not grow up as criminals, or your economy could provide higher wages for all those families, so one full-time job would suffice to provide a home and food.
Or do you say that about 50% of American couples shouldn't have children?
Your ideas don't provide solutions, but you keep complaining about the problems.
What happened? it worked fine for decades for most people. The man went work,the mother stayed home with the kid.
1 problem was people wanted "More" and thought it was ok to toss the kid in a day care play pen and send the wife to work. Which means MORE transportation cost, finer clothes for her to wear in public on the job, and other expenses that go along with working. So a good portion of what she makes pays for her job to be done with the kid.
Solution. Live with in your means. If you can afford 1 child, have 1 child, NOT 7. If you can only afford to buy a single wide mobile home on a acre,then don't buy a 300,000 $ home and starve the kid.
Live within your means.
The idea was that parents SHARED the parenting. The problem was that women were fully dependent on men, to take care of them. Would you like to be fully dependent on someone else, to take care of you? No, you even think that's what 'socialism' does and you want to be completely independent. So, why aren't women allowed to want some independence too? Why only men?
But you're correct that this resulted in wages going down so hard, that now both parents need to work. But that's not the women's fault, that's capitalism's fault, for exploiting the new 'working capital' (that's how they call people).
It massively increased profits, but they started sharing even less.
"Live within your means." I agree, but for a lot of people that's 0 children
and a one bedroom apartment or studio, while both working full-time
(and sometimes multiple jobs).
If you were happy with him, I would start to worry.
wouldn't be so bad if the blacks weren't bullied, or the blacks didn't bully whites ,but sadly it happened in my school days.
If you ever thought desegretion actually worked, just look at the neighborhoods. Still to this day heavily divided as far as color.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
What happened? Did he fall up the stairs and hurt his head?
Sounds like at 1 time he wanted to put criminals in jail?
only registered users can see external links
He blocked the first woman to be nominated to the supreme court. What the video and read the words.
Biden is not completely innocent of discrimination. He definitely supported racist policies too. Some liberals might strategically forget that and fully supported Biden, after being told by the media 24/7 that he was the 'safe candidate', but for most and especially for progressives, Biden was just the 'lesser evil'. Remember how Bernie Sanders had massive rallies, with parks and football stadiums, filled with supporters? Did you see those for Biden?
But that wasn't the point. Biden was way less popular.
People were just dumb enough to listen to the media again.
So his racism is just something coping people took for granted.
In any case, racism is only a reason to vote for Trump, if you like it.