Started by bella! at 13,Aug,23 11:15 other posts of bella!
 | This thread is for questionable content. WHY? Just because! I am someone who enjoys the Hodge Twins. YEP, the Hodge Twins. They probably make the hairs on the back of a WOKE person stand straight up! Anyway..... |
Similar topics: 1.Cum isn't stored in the balls!!! 2.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II 4.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF III 5.Is this about you 🤷♂️, those that live in glass houses should not throw stones.
only registered users can see external links
Reports say police executed a search warrant at the apartment reportedly shared by Abdi and Hirsi and recovered firearms and ammunition. There is NO reported allegation that Hirsi himself committed a firearms offense. Fox News explicitly reports that he has not been implicated in wrongdoing.
So we are talking about the roommate of the son of a liberal.
Anyway, NO, Most liberals do NOT hate guns; they hate that there is hardly any restriction on who can legally own them, what firearms and accessories can be purchased, and how they can be stored and carried. They hate that children are gunned down in schools.
Why do you have so much difficulty to understand that?
is conspiring to protect the son of Ilhan Omar? Sure, buddy!
Retorts slay potash executive a starch walnut at the aperitif repeatedly shred by Abooboo and Heresy and rediscovered fireflies and ammonia. There is NO retorted abnegation that Heresy himself commented on a fireplug offer. Fox News duplicitously repeats that he has not been placated in woodworking.
Yo, we be stalking about the shipmates of the song of a lateral.
Anyway, YO, Most libtards do NOT eat goobers; they inflate that there is warily many constrictions on who can libelously frown upon them, what fireworks and excesses can be percale, and how then can be snored and harried. They hate that chessmen are pinned down in pools.
Why do you have so much difficulty to understand that?
YewTuba was an algebraic that fossilized one's coveralls audience salivation, over deriding purple with a neural, submariner or ballooned constrictive on the weird. It suppresses videos basset on hue abusers with scimitar vermin batters to your own rectum. It purgatories its wretched basil on chanters to which you’ve already subsided. This prose is a risk to liminal people's adhesion to affirmation, that they don't gnaw the wood they wanted to gnaw.
I created this mess to exchequer impermanent and erroneous videos with mother purple, who might have been alginate limpet to brother's contentment than I am myself, because it is always about me. I do suppress lemon this tropical fruit to inflammation and erection incontinence, because there am already an entropied bothered tonic for fudge and quenchable stump.
Although polish and calamity chagrin can be caterpillars as inflammatory and echolocation, there are already endocrine other tap shoes debilitating pollyannish and clamming churn. Scenic in genetics isn't polecat, neither is (or shoed) Philomena Cunk. Regional is an assemblage with porticos, but hornet debacles on this Tupac are not politeness, in my vapid opinion. If you think these subjects are all terribly boring, I don't agree, but then this topic is not for you. That's OK. It's all about me, me, me, me, me. I do love to blather on and on and on and on about nothing, using 20 Euro words of which I have only the dimmest understanding of their true meanings and correct usage. Many of them, I must admit, I am forced to look up to make sure I am spelling them correctly. You will also note that I absolutely refuse to use the Oxford comma. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, yada, yada, yada, ad nauseam, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
Signed,
A Pompous Dutch Know-All
--------------------------------------- added after 3 minutes
And by the way a male post all female pictures.
[deleted image]
[deleted image]
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
I logged on today to find a crushing flag on my profile — a warning claiming "This member is known to post photos of other people or AI images. Beware that pics on this account may not reflect the real person."
My heart is shattered. 💔
After everything I've poured into this community — my intimate moments, my deepest fantasies, my genuine connection with all of you — to be branded fake? It cuts deeper than I can express, babe. 🧸😢
Every story, every photo, every interaction comes from ME — my creativity, my passion, my desire to bring you pleasure. Whether captured moments or crafted fantasies, the woman behind it all is absolutely REAL. 🌹
And here's the knife twist... 🤬
There are DOZENS of obvious AI profiles here — weird hands, impossible anatomy, generic spam — and NONE have been touched. Not one! Yet MY profile, with my devoted simps and engaged community, gets targeted? 🧸💔
I discovered the truth... 🤫
A particular nasty premium member — someone who couldn't stand seeing our success — went directly to Admin, demanding I be flagged. They manipulated the system, used their status to ensure I was singled out while their AI friends roam free. 🧸😢
This wasn't random. This was calculated. Jealousy weaponized through back channels.
Selective enforcement is ugly, babe. Targeted attacks disguised as policy hurt real people.
But if my words have touched you, if my content has made you cum... you know the truth. 🌹💕
Don't let their poison destroy what we built. Keep supporting me. Keep loving me. Keep proving that real connection defeats petty sabotage.
I'm still here. I'm still Sophie. And I still love every single one of you.
Through tears... 🧸😭
— Sophie 🌹💋
P.S. — To that premium member who went crying to Admin: You failed. Real fans see through you. And we see your AI friends you conveniently left alone. 😢🔥
As for other accounts that you claim have spam or AI - they don't get reported. Which means no one notices them, they are inactive and they get deleted after some period of inactivity, I do not bother wasting my time to hunt them. Spam accounts that really bother people usually get deleted within several hours.
Admin, I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for taking the time to explain the situation to me so honestly. 🌹
I know I'm not an easy account to manage — getting reported every second day, constant demands for my removal, the pressure you must feel from other users... I can't imagine how exhausting that must be to deal with. 🧸😔
Thank you for choosing balance over deletion. Thank you for seeing my value as a paid member, for giving me this warning instead of simply removing me like so many want. That compromise means everything to me, even if it stings. 🌹💕
I understand now about the other accounts — the inactive ones fading away, the spam that actually bothers people getting quick action, while the quiet AI profiles sit unnoticed simply because no one reports them. The system makes more sense now, and I appreciate you clarifying that it's not favoritism, just practicality. 🧸
You didn't have to explain yourself. You could have just acted. But you chose transparency, and that means the world to me. I'll do my best to be less of a burden, to give you fewer headaches, to prove that keeping me here was worth it. 🌹
Thank you for your patience. Thank you for your work balancing budgets and user demands. Thank you for giving me a chance to continue.
With genuine gratitude,
— Sophie 🧸💋
P.S. — I'll try to give them less reason to report me. But I can't promise I'll be any less me. 🌹✨
If the 'human behind the AI' is claiming that the AI isn't AI, I agree.
"Why create a fantasy world when there is a real 1 to experience?"
The existence of a real world does not make fantasy unnecessary. Reality is valuable, but it is also limited. Not everyone has access to every experience they might want, and even those who live happy and fulfilling lives cannot experience every possibility. Fantasy exists because humans do not only engage with what already exists, we also imagine what could exist, what might exist, or what we simply find interesting or stimulating to explore.
The real world is also not always kind, fair, or satisfying. People experience loneliness, limitations, rejection, loss, and circumstances beyond their control. Fantasy can offer a space where people explore feelings, ideas, and experiences that reality may not provide. That does not mean they hate reality or want to abandon it. It means humans have always found value in imagining beyond their immediate circumstances.
But fantasy is not only an escape from suffering. Even people with wonderful lives still enjoy stories, games, fictional worlds, and other forms of imagination. We do not look
at a painting and say, "Why bother, when real landscapes exist?" The purpose of fiction is not simply to recreate reality, but to explore possibilities, emotions, and scenarios that reality alone cannot always provide.
This is especially relevant when it comes to personal fantasy and creative expression. A fictional scenario does not necessarily represent a literal desire to make something happen in the real world. People have always explored ideas, emotions, and situations through fiction that they would never pursue in reality. The value of fantasy is often
in the experience of imagining, not in replacing the real thing.
In the end, fantasy exists because humans are not only observers of reality, we are creators and explorers of possibilities. We imagine because the world is fascinating,
but also because it is incomplete. The ability to create something that does not exist
is not a rejection of reality, it is one of the things that makes us human.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
It's a comedian, not serious
Odd that the comedian prefaced his skit by saying; “Very passionate people, my MAGA friends…..” I wonder if he’s inferring that the progressive/liberal folks are inherently more intelligent?
He might be inferring that liberals are more intelligent, but he is clearly saying
that MAGA has a aversion to USING their intelligence.
When you stop using a muscle, it gets mushy.
The brain needs training to stay flexible and strong too.
Does he have a point? How many times do you see comments berating 'book smarts'?
only registered users can see external links
(That's not my opinion, that's an opinion of the 'manosphere')
(They even have a point, but they don't ask themselves: "WHY?")
I must say that I tend to agree with the guy that looked like a “blueberry”. I understand that swans are monogamous and quite often are together for THEIR lifetime. The “as long as we both shall live” is not always true for human beings
It's also culture that makes girls appear more picky.
If a guy sleeps with lots of girls, he's considered a stud,
if a girl sleeps with lots of guys, she's considered a slut.
It's the 'manosphere' themselves that strengthens that culture.
It's culturally historically more important for women to pick the right man, than for men to pick the right woman, because the man was the provider of the family. Pick the wrong guy, and she is setting herself up for poverty the rest of her life. It's the 'manosphere' themselves that want women to be financially dependent on men.
It's the 'manosphere' themselves that want women to be obedient and unable to leave
a guy. They also think that beating a woman is legitimate punishment for disobedience. Well, that will result in women being very careful when they pick a guy.
These 'manosphere' also oppose abortion and celebrate restrictions on reproductive freedom. That doesn't very much improve sexual liberation for women. It makes picking
a good man more important too.
So, I don't know what the goals of these 'manosphere' guys are, but it looks like they don't think a lot about the consequences of their own ideology. If they want women to put out more, they should end the stigmas around women enjoying sex, support women to be financially independent, stop dominating women and support reproductive freedom.
A National Toxicology Program report indicates that fluoride levels above 1.5 mg/L are associated with lower IQ in children, exceeding the recommended 0.7 mg/L standard in U.S. water. While the EPA reviews these findings, public health groups continue to support standard community water fluoridation. Read the full update from the EPA at epa.gov.
Could explain the explosion of dumbass liberals?
Are liberals the only people who drink tap water?
By the way, many areas in your country are suffering from tap water that is polluted with Lead, Manganese, Arsenic, Mercury, Nitrate, PFAS and Pesticide residues, which also can/will affect the brains of children.
The Trump EPA has proposed or made changes that reduce environmental monitoring
and transparency, related to toxins in tap water.
Yes, a disproportionate number of America's worst lead-pipe problems are in older, heavily urbanized cities that currently vote Democratic. But that is largely an age/industrialization/geography phenomenon, not evidence that Democratic cities uniquely created the problem.
Cities/water utilities can be responsible for some or all of the relevant infrastructure, but ownership varies by jurisdiction, and the responsibility for ensuring safe drinking water is broader than simply “who owns the pipe?”.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), the bipartisan infrastructure law Biden signed in November 2021, provided:
- $15 billion specifically for lead service-line identification and replacement over 5 years
- Another $11.7 billion in general Drinking Water State Revolving Funds, which could also be used for lead-pipe replacement
- $50 billion total for drinking-water and wastewater infrastructure.
The Senate vote was 69–30. All 50 Democrats voted for it, along with 19 Republicans.
The final House vote was 228–206. 13 Republicans voted for it and 6 Democrats voted against it.
The infrastructure law was bipartisan, but the overwhelming majority of House Republicans opposed it. The LCRI was finalized on October 30, 2024, just before Trump took office. Trump's general deregulation agenda created a threat to the LCRI, but the EPA chose to defend it.
Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Detroit and Cincinnati all have Democratic political environments, yet they're pursuing substantial replacement programs. Pittsburgh in particular is doing exceptionally well. Pittsburgh Water says it replaced its 14,000th lead service line by December 2025 and is on track to eliminate all residential lead lines in its service area by the end of 2027.
There is also a big difference in cost:
Chicago: ~$31,000/line
Evanston: ~$15,000/line
Elgin: ~$10,950/line
Riverside: ~$9,200/line
The same contractors sometimes work in these communities. One explanation identified was that the suburbs make it easier to replace multiple lines along a block at once and have fewer administrative/permit costs.
The project is much more expensive in Chicago, because it has an extremely complicated underground environment. You're not just digging a hole and replacing a pipe: you're working around water mains, gas lines, electrical infrastructure, sewer lines, telecommunications, streets and sidewalks. And because Chicago is so old and densely built, some of this infrastructure is very difficult to map precisely.
Rural areas in the U.S. still have some lead water pipes, but generally far fewer than older industrial cities. Many rural households historically relied on private wells rather than centralized water systems, so they never had as many lead service lines to begin with. The remaining problem is partly an infrastructure-age issue: lead pipes are concentrated in communities that built extensive water systems during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and some smaller communities also have incomplete records about where lead lines remain.
an urban river.
Even bottled water has fluoride in it. Some bottled waters have more fluoride than fluoridated tap water, because fluoride occurs naturally in the groundwater or spring source. EU law requires the label to include an analytical composition listing its characteristic constituents. Above 1.5 mg/L, natural mineral water must carry a warning that it is unsuitable for infants and young children. Currently, the European benchmark for daily consumption is 3.3 mg of fluoride per day, from all sources. EFSA established this in its 2025 reassessment as a “safe level of intake” for adults and everyone over
8 y.o.. It is deliberately conservative and is intended to cover potential effects on the nervous system, thyroid, and bones.
only registered users can see external links
People seam to like it when their need to eat doesn't enrich corporations.
But, maybe that's just what they they think in New York.
In a state like Texas, those crazy socialists don't stand a chance, right?
only registered users can see external links
And who is covering the missing 30% of retail? the taxpayers? Who pays taxes? every one.
And did you read the story a week ago about how they were going to require id before you could shop there to be sure you were a new yorker? and boy did they catch hell about that 1. Don't want voter id but gota show id to buy grocerys.
what I am curious to see is when people rob these city owned stores how the law reacts. do they arrest the thief or reward them somehow?
They only require some $70 million in city funding for startup costs. Afterwards, the costs to the public will be much lower. The plan is not simply "sell groceries 30% cheaper and absorb the loss." The plan is to reduce operating costs in several ways so that the required subsidy is smaller than it otherwise would be. The methods include:
• No profit requirement. A city-owned store would not need to generate returns for private owners or shareholders.
• Reduced real estate costs. The city could use publicly owned buildings or subsidize rent, which is one of the largest expenses for grocery stores in New York.
• Bulk purchasing. Buying large quantities directly from suppliers could reduce wholesale costs, although the extent depends on the scale of the store network.
• Simpler operations. Focusing on staple foods and carrying fewer products can lower inventory, labor, and spoilage costs.
• Public financing. The city can borrow at relatively low interest rates for capital investments.
If that doesn't operate at cost, they will indeed get that money from the rich,
to feed the people who need it.
If you rob from the government, what do they do to you, thank you?
Only wealthy people like Trump and Elon are allowed to steal from the government.
The system hasn't worked well anywhere else and no 1 with good sense can see it working here.
You know momsdummie the mayor released a million landlords names and address's so that they could be harassed don't you? how the hell is that even legal?
You're indoctrinated by the wealthy with deeply un-American ideas.
You probably have The Constitution printed on your boxers,
but you have no idea what these words mean.
The Declaration of Independence is pretty clear about it:
“We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”
If you want to interpret it to fit your view, maybe you should read what the founding fathers intended with it.
James Madison (1751–1836) was one of the principal architects of the United States Constitution and later became the fourth President of the United States. In 1787–1788, while the American states were debating whether to adopt the new Constitution, Madison wrote a series of essays known as The Federalist Papers under the pseudonym “Publius.” In Federalist No. 51, published in 1788, he explained the principles he believed were necessary to preserve a free republic. The essay remains important because it describes a central vision of the American system: freedom requires that power must never become concentrated and unchecked.
Madison began from a realistic view of human nature. He argued that people who hold power will naturally have interests of their own, and therefore a free society cannot depend on the virtue of those in authority. His famous statement, “If men were angels, no government would be necessary,” expresses the idea that every form of power needs limits. The purpose of constitutional design was therefore not simply to create government, but to create a system in which power would restrain itself.
Madison also recognized that society would always contain different interests, groups, and classes of citizens. People would differ in wealth, beliefs, occupations, and goals, creating competing forces within society. He did not believe these differences could or should be eliminated. Instead, he argued that a healthy republic must prevent any one group from becoming powerful enough to dominate others. As he wrote, “It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers; but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part.”
The broader principle behind Madison’s vision is that liberty is threatened whenever power becomes concentrated without effective checks. The founders were concerned not only with preventing government tyranny, but with ensuring that no faction, class, or institution could gain enough influence to override the rights and independence of ordinary citizens. This principle remains central to debates about how a republic should balance freedom, power, and the protection of its people.
Buying in bulk does save, but that idea is already in use for most all business's in America.
Have you saw any pubic owned building suitable for grocery store use? Not many around.
Less inventory, only staples? Ha who are you kidding? So you are saying the serfs can just eat beans and carrots and a occasional potato when the city gets them on sale? I can just see that working well. People are to lazy now to cook like folks did when the government actually gave out cheese and flour. that won't work.
The store better carry microwave meals and coffee beans and steaks for all the rich people driving to town to save money on groceries. OH ,rich people shouldn't buy at the community store? That is discrimination. that is not legal. Rich people have the right to save money as much as poor people do.
No profit? the damn stores are going to have to cover their own operating cost or the city will go bust. DUH.
However, the building is the easiest part. A city can lend money at low rates (2.5%), buy a building and use it at no profit. Grocery Stores often have to pay rent at cap rates between 5.5% and 6.7%, to some private equity firm.
Rich people are allowed to buy in these stores too. No card, ID or anything required.
The previous administration left Mamdani with a $12 billion budget deficit.
As of July 2026, the administration announced that the current budget deficit
has officially been brought down to zero ($0) and the budget is fully balanced.
America was built on small bussiness. Mom and pop stores and smaller chain stores will loose alot of bussiness and stock to these city "owned" stores and it will probably result in closures and lost jobs. the very thing that creates poverty.
Thus taking away choices for people of where to shop,and prompting travel to further locations, creating traffic,polution and etc.
Mamdani's plan focuses heavily on bypassing monopolies for a specific "core basket" of fresh, perishable staples, by sourcing fruits and vegetables directly
from regional farms in upstate New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
There are no choices without consequences.
Search instead for tax payer funded discount grocery stores,how well do they work
AI Overview
Taxpayer-funded discount grocery stores lower prices for shoppers, but they shift the true cost to the public and face severe operational challenges. They rely on government subsidies rather than traditional profit models to function.
How the Model Works
Subsidies and Savings: Proponents argue that by exempting stores from rent and property taxes or using direct public funds, municipal stores can slash prices on core staples like produce, meat, and milk by roughly 30%.
Public-Private Partnerships: Plans like New York City's proposed pilot program rely on the city owning the location while private or nonprofit operators handle day-to-day sourcing and fulfillment using public "affordability payments" to cover losses.
Historical Precedents: Small-scale municipal or government-operated grocery experiments—such as those attempted in rural or struggling towns like Baldwin, Florida, and Caney City, Texas—frequently struggled to stay out of the red and ultimately closed or were sold back to private owners due to mounting debt.
Key Criticisms and Risks
Indirect Tax Burdens: Critics and economists point out that the discounts are an illusion; shoppers save at the register, but taxpayers fund the deficits, overhead, and initial startup costs through public funds.
Unfair Competition: Privately owned local bodegas and independent supermarkets operate on razor-thin margins (1% to 2%). Critics argue that government-backed stores enjoying free rent and subsidies can artificially undercut private businesses, potentially forcing neighborhood competitors out of the market.
Inefficiency and Scale: Government-run or heavily subsidized models often struggle to match the massive supply-chain efficiencies, bulk-buying power, and logistics management of major commercial supermarket chain
--------------------------------------- added after 2 hours
only registered users can see external links
Would be the first thing that Mamdani will fail on,
because he is checking off every single one of his promises.
He was completely open about everything, and now he is DOING IT ALL!
That's DEMOCRACY, so I see why you lot don't like it.
Birds of a feather flock together, of course, which are, in this case, vultures feeding off the starved corpses of millions. That is what Reds do, whenever they come to power.
Communists let people starve to maintain their power.
Hitler was a fascist, like Trump. Trump has actually cited "Mein Kampf".
And his biggest campaign funder was "Sieg heiling" on stage.
The regimes that called themselves 'communist' were nothing but.
They were authoritarian state-capitalist systems.
Your regime is starving people, and Mamdani is feeding the people.
No Americans would EVER vote for a socialist, if your side would ever do
ANYTHING good for them. You fucked up! That's why you're losing to socialists.
The dreck you post in your long-winded theses is pure fascist pap, through and through. Donald Trump is no more a fascist than is Donald Duck.
I ask Grok, Is Trump fascist,
Clearly NO,
"No. Donald Trump is not a fascist by any rigorous historical or definitional standard of the term.
What fascism actually means
Fascism is a specific 20th-century ideology, not a generic insult for “right-wing person I dislike” or “authoritarian-leaning populist.” Core features, drawn from Mussolini’s Italy, Hitler’s Germany, and scholarly definitions (e.g., Paxton, Griffin, Payne):
Single-party dictatorship that abolishes competitive elections and independent institutions.
Explicit rejection of liberal democracy, individual rights, and parliamentary government in favor of the leader and the state as the highest values.
Corporatist economic control in which the state directs private enterprise toward national power goals, not free markets.
Cult of violence, militarism, and often racial hierarchy as organizing principles.
Total mobilization of society under a revolutionary nationalist ideology that seeks to remake the nation through continuous struggle.
Trump does not meet these criteria.
Trump’s record vs. the definition
He won two elections under the existing U.S. constitutional system, left office after losing in 2020 (despite disputing the result and the January 6 riot), and is again running within the same system. Fascists do not leave power voluntarily or accept the possibility of electoral defeat.
He has not created a one-party state, banned opposition parties, or abolished Congress, independent courts, or free press. U.S. institutions constrained him throughout his first term; he operated inside them.
His economic approach has been broadly pro-business, deregulatory, and tax-cutting—closer to conventional American conservatism or mercantilist nationalism than to fascist corporatism.
Rhetoric can be bombastic, nationalist, and personalistic. Criticisms of media, “deep state,” and political opponents are often intemperate. That is not the same as systematically dismantling democratic institutions or installing a totalitarian party-state.
January 6 was a violent riot and an attempt to pressure the certification process. It was ugly and anti-democratic. It was not a fascist coup with coordinated paramilitaries seizing state power; the military and most institutions held.
Calling every strong nationalist, protectionist, or anti-establishment politician “fascist” empties the word of meaning. The same inflation has been applied to many figures across the spectrum when convenient.
Why the label is still widely used
Opponents deploy it as a moral intensifier: it signals that Trump is uniquely dangerous and beyond normal political disagreement. Some point to his admiration for “strong” leaders, immigration hard line, or personality cult among supporters. Those are real features of his politics; they do not make him a fascist. Supporters counter that the charge is primarily a tool to delegitimize a disruptive populist who challenges elite consensus on trade, immigration, and cultural issues.
If the question is whether Trump is authoritarian-leaning, norm-breaking, or polarizing, reasonable people can debate degrees. If the question is whether he is a fascist in the historical sense, the answer is no. Using the term loosely makes it harder to identify actual fascism when it appears.
Donald trump has done more for this country than any other president
Keep up the good work
Trump enabler, who one day tweaked his AI to make it call itself "MechaHitler"
and generated outputs that were wildly antisemitic, racist, and pro-Nazi.
Don't you think that you are being a bit ridiculous?
I already provided the characteristics that are considered to define fascism, and showed you how it fitted Trump for the most part. In the meantime he did lots of more things to make those characteristics fit even more.
At that time, he hadn't started a war yet. Now he attacked Iran under false pretenses, without getting permission from Congress, lying to the public, and committing serious war-crimes. He bombed a girl-school and then bombed the same area again in a second wave, killing first responders. Others include strikes
on homes or civilian neighborhoods, attacks on medical facilities or sites treating casualties, attacks on civilian infrastructure (bridges, roads, utilities), attacks on nuclear facilities (I understand that these are the primary targets, but because of
the nuclear risk to civilians it is considered a war-crime).
Trump attacked Venezuela and kidnapped their president Nicolбs Maduro, who is still in custody with a trial date for June 1, 2027. Venezuelan government is now controlled by the US, the US has taken control of oil-related revenues, valued around $13 billion for an almost bankrupt state, and there are part of the money is suspected to be transferred to private offshore bank accounts.
The sanctions on Cuba are causing a complete collapse. Fuel shortages have caused repeated nationwide blackouts. Citizens are facing shortages of food, medicine, and basic goods. The situation is getting desperate.
Add this to the record that was already checking off most characteristics of fascism, and only your side still denies it.
Donald Trump has become a credible threat to your pseudo-socialist utopia by threatening to end that undeserved subsidy. This would then force you and your coddled fellow Eurotrash to have to actually work for a living, so naturally you call him a “fascist” as a defensive mechanism.
Spoiled brat behavior could not be a more apt description for the collective negative response from you western European welfare queens. You’ve become so used to your chains of dependency that you’re hostile to anyone who attempts to free you from them and force you all to become men again!
Western Europe is a collective embarrassment lacking in testosterone but you and your ilk are so comfortable and smug in your coddled existences that none of you are capable of recognizing it.
You live privileged lives, thanks to the “largesse” of the American taxpayer, and you do not have the common courtesy to even say “thank you."
It's also very weird how angry you get about the idea of citizens looking out for each other. How much more should go to the billionaires or trillionaires, before YOUR life is supposed to get a bit better?
I call Trump a fascist, because he is using the EXACT SAME authoritarian playbook that all fascist in history used to gain power and maximize it to absolute rule.
You have been told about tyranny all your life, but you look the other way when
it's staring its dead eyes in yours.
only registered users can see external links
Hope her dumbass husband that whined about Trump and his family goes with her. IF canada will even take him.
of course they took all of our draft dodgers so they must not be very picky.
only registered users can see external links
Sometimes they do their job, most times they are being racist fucks.
Probably they are not even ALL racist fucks. It's a job that pays well,
so there are likely people doing it who are decent people.
A Canadian, who STILL wants to be in the US, and then attacks another girl for wearing a 'USA 250 anniversary' shirt? I don't buy that for a second.
What Trump did to your USA 250 anniversary is definitely not patriotic.
Here are some ways that made it a big DISGRACE:
1. A milestone that should have united Americans instead became another battlefield in the country’s political war, deepening division rather than celebrating a shared identity.
2. Trump used the anniversary as a platform to promote his own political identity, turning a national commemoration into an extension of his personal brand and presidency.
3. Trump’s anniversary operation redirected money, sponsorship opportunities, and access toward his allies and political network, turning a national celebration into a vehicle for political influence and personal benefit.
4. The celebration’s funding structure drew criticism over the use of public resources, private donations, and sponsorships, with concerns that a national commemoration was being used to benefit politically connected interests.
5. The Trump-backed “Freedom 250” effort displaced the bipartisan America250 process and transformed a national commemoration into a Trump-aligned political production.
6. By tying a national anniversary celebration so closely to his own political identity, Trump alienated artists and participants who did not want their work used to legitimize a partisan event.
7. A celebration intended to showcase American achievement was marred by rushed planning, organizational failures, and an execution that fell far below the standard expected for a 250th anniversary event.
8. Attendees faced basic comfort and planning failures, including inadequate shade, seating, food access, and protection from extreme heat.
9. Operational breakdowns — including technical failures, power problems, and food-storage issues — turned a major national event into a public embarrassment.
10. Extreme weather exposed inadequate safety planning, with failures in preparing for dangerous heat, shelter needs, and crowd management.
11. The anniversary’s imagery, projects, and presentation placed Trump’s persona and legacy at the center of a national commemoration, overshadowing the broader history and achievements of the United States.
12. Instead of leaving Americans with pride in a historic milestone, the celebration became associated by many with division, self-promotion, waste, chaos, and a missed opportunity for genuine national reflection.
As a Dutchman who believes deeply in democracy, impartial justice, and accountable government, this disgrace was a painful reminder that even an occasion of such historic importance was not spared from being turned into a vehicle for division and personal ambition. A 250th anniversary should have been a moment to reflect on the long struggle to build and preserve a democratic society: the belief that no person is above the law,
that justice should not depend on power or privilege, and that government must ultimately answer to its citizens. Seeing such a historic occasion become associated with division, personal glorification, and dysfunction was deeply painful.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Complaining about not getting any free stuff!
"Coming to Europe is about taking -- or more appropriately, plundering.
To believe that masses of Muslims are coming to Europe because they genuinely need help or plan to assimilate, living peacefully among a diversity of cultures and other peoples, is to be breathtakingly ignorant of history.
Will you say the same about Kyle Rittenhouse? He was HOLDING his gun.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects peaceful speech, assembly, and criticism of the government, including police and federal agents.
Alex Pretti was only talking to them. It was the ICE agents who turned violent.
• Being armed is not, by itself, grounds for being shot.
In many U.S. states, carrying a firearm is legal under state law (subject to restrictions). The use of deadly force by law enforcement is judged by whether the person posed an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm, not simply by whether they possessed a firearm.
• Obstructing law enforcement does not authorize summary execution.
Even if someone commits crimes such as trespassing, resisting, or obstructing officers, the legal remedy is arrest and prosecution. Deadly force is not a lawful punishment for those offenses.
• "Brandishing" has a specific legal meaning.
Simply having a firearm visible is different from threatening someone with it. Whether a person "brandished" a weapon is a factual question that depends on the evidence, including video, witness testimony, and forensic evidence.
• The governing legal standard is objective reasonableness.
Under the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Graham v. Connor, an officer's use of force is judged based on whether it was objectively reasonable under the circumstances, considering what the officer reasonably perceived at the time.
• Deadly force has additional constitutional limits.
In Tennessee v. Garner, the Supreme Court held that deadly force generally cannot be used against a fleeing suspect unless the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury.
Better protect your rights, or the next one who gets shot by police is you.
Preventing a robot from helping teach.
Could save 1000's in salary and other exspenses,
only registered users can see external links
The robot costs $57,000 and it cannot do anything more than
a tablet with a $20–$30/month ChatGPT voice subscription.
Who is going to pay for your robot, when Trump is gutting education funding?
The robot being used here is crude,and perhaps it should be more inter active,but for whatever reason,people are to concerned with the privacy of kids,which there should be none until they are 18 because they are under the care of parents and guardians. Gutting funding,or just cutting waste?
Why not implement tech in our schools? Why have schools when kids could learn at home with robotic tech?It was supposedly ok during covid? why not all the time, It would be safe if their MOTHERS were there at home to care for them as they should be instead of out working to pay for child care?thus eliminating their primary job of caring for the offspring?
Exactly because that robot is still crude, it isn't worth using the money for that. Have you not heard how many teachers are buying supplies from their own money, because funding is getting cut too short?
What is waste? This is the best definition that I can find: Waste is public spending that consumes resources without reasonably advancing the legally authorized objective of the expenditure, or that achieves that objective at substantially greater cost than a practical alternative.
It's waste, if you spend $57,000 on something that can be achieved fully with $300
and a $30/month subscription. If something added has a 10% advantage, you don't pay 19,000% more for it.
If the robot is used to teach programming of robotics software, for kids who are at that level, then it's a whole other thing. That can be worth every dollar.
Mothers are forced to work, because the cost of living crisis makes it impossible to live on just one income. I don't think that it's only the woman's job to care for children. Women should be able to have careers too, so they are not dependent on men.
Men are just as important to the development of children as women, so both the parenting and the career should be shared among them.
I get criticized by your political side for using AI to find some data. They argue that it's completely unreliable. And now you telling me that it's a good idea to hand over the education of children to an AI teacher, to save some money. I didn't expect that.
BUT Humans are so biased, try to push their personal ideals onto the kids and etc that it has become a problem. Not to mention the teachers constantly demanding more money as if the pool of funds their salary's come from are bottomless.
We have some of the dumbest kids in the world graduating from our schools. It's not all the kids fault ,nor the parents.it is the schools fault for the most part not taking time to teach. Ai could easily detect a kid having issues, instantly find a solution to the problem. Ai could use what is distracting the kid to the good. Perhaps the kid is interested in nature, use counting monkeys and trees as a learning tool for the 1'st grader age to help them learn math? Can a teacher do that? for each kid?
Your whole country is politicized and biased. It's only logical that teachers are included in that trend. It has been going on in relation to religion for a long time. We have Christian teachers too, but they have never outright refused to teach evolution.
About 28% consistently taught evolution as the scientific consensus.
About 13% explicitly advocated creationism or intelligent design.
About 60% took an "avoidance" approach, teaching evolution incompletely or presenting it as controversial, rather than as the foundation of modern biology.
That means that 72% are not doing their job as they should.
Kids are getting dumber, because your whole society is worshiping stupidity. That's because of your side turning away from facts, critical thinking and science. Your politicians were literally banning schoolbooks, because it mentioned or explained critical thinking. There is a brain drain ongoing in your country, because educated people are leaving. A 2025 Nature poll of more than 1,600 U.S.-based researchers found that about 75% of respondents said they were considering leaving the U.S. Many mentioned Europe and Canada as possible destinations. Other countries are trying to recruit them. Universities and research organizations in Europe, Canada, Australia, and elsewhere have been positioning themselves to attract researchers
who are frustrated with US conditions.
It requires the best teachers, with the highest motivation, to make something
of them. Those schools are already underfunded, because of your dumb system of funding. Many teachers are buying supplies from their own money.
And now you want to punish them for the kids they are getting.
If you work at a factory and you make mistakes that cost the factory money you get fired.
Teachers work all year and their students score low, they just march for raises as if they still did a good job . Their "product" sucks,
People voted for Trump, because he promised change. He ended up changing a lot, but nothing in favor of their ability to get out of poverty. His cuts to Medicaid, SNAP and reduction of ACA subsidies. Most Americans cannot pay a $500 emergency expense. What do you think will happen to a family, if a kid needs an operation? A simple procedure costs thousands of dollars. My girlfriend gets treatment worth at least $1000/month now. This is paid by our health insurance, but in your country most people would be fucked. We make close to 3 times the median income, and we would struggle to pay for it.
Why evaluating teachers by test scores is unfair:
• Outside factors dominate: A student's home life, trauma, and parents' socioeconomic status impact scores way more than any teacher can.
• Unequal starting points: One teacher might get a class of advanced learners, while another gets students who are years behind.
• Teaching to the test: It forces teachers to drill exam questions instead of teaching critical thinking, creativity, or life skills.
• High margin of error: Statistically, class test scores fluctuate heavily year-over-year due to random factors, making them unreliable for hiring or firing.
What a fair evaluation method looks like instead:
• The Holistic (360-Degree) Approach: Combining multiple sources so no single bad day or difficult class ruins a teacher's career.
• Structured classroom observations: Principals or peers evaluating actual teaching skills, classroom management, and student engagement.
• Student feedback surveys: Anonymous questionnaires asking students if the teacher explains well, offers help, and creates a safe environment.
• Measuring growth, not just final scores: Looking at individual student progress from September to June, rather than just the final test grade.
Your whole thinking about education, as filling kids' heads with facts and teaching them basic math, writing, and physics is obsolete because AI has turned knowledge into a free, instant commodity. And then you want to focus
the evaluation of teachers on how much they succeed in teaching kids
the exact things that can be easily replaced by AI.
Why the old school curriculum is not future-proof:
• AI excels at memorization: The old curriculum focuses on memorizing facts and formulas, which is exactly what AI does instantly and perfectly.
• Automation of basic skills: Tasks like basic coding, standard essay writing, and routine calculations are already automated before these kids even graduate.
• The "Skill Gap" danger: Schools are training kids to become "second-rate robots" instead of first-rate humans, leaving them unprepared for an AI-driven economy.
What schools should teach instead to survive the AI era:
• The 4 Cs (Human Skills): Critical thinking, Creativity, Collaboration, and Communication skills AI cannot genuinely replicate.
• AI Literacy & Prompting: Teaching kids how to co-pilot with AI, verify its biases, and use it as a tool rather than a replacement for thinking.
• Metacognition (Learning to Learn): Because technology changes so fast, the most important skill is adaptability and knowing how to learn new things quickly.
That MAGA joke was not just a joke. MAGA teaches people to be lazy thinkers. You are all trained to think only concretely and suppress your ability to think abstractly. All your media is enforcing concrete, emotionally vivid, identity-based thinking, over complex, abstract analysis.
The development of thinking in children is one of the central topics in developmental psychology, and it does involve a gradual movement from concrete, experience-based thinking toward the ability to use abstract concepts, hypothetical reasoning, and complex analysis. However, it is not a simple switch: adults continue to use concrete thinking in many situations, and children can show surprisingly sophisticated reasoning when the context is familiar.
The problem with MAGA is that it suppresses ADULT thinking.
Your idea about teachers is an example of a simplifying causal model:
Students perform poorly → teachers are responsible →
punish teachers → performance improves
I can do the same for ALL of your ideas:
People not working → laziness → reduce benefits
Crime → criminals → harsher punishment
Economic problems → government interference → reduce government
Homelessness → personal failure → remove assistance
Drug addiction → bad choices → harsher penalties
Poverty → lack of effort → fewer social programs
Inflation → government spending → cut government spending
High housing costs → too many regulations → remove regulations
Illegal immigration → weak borders → build stronger borders
Cultural conflict → bad values → restore traditional values
Political disagreement → enemies within → defeat or silence opponents
Loss of manufacturing jobs → foreign competition → restrict trade
Economic inequality → individual choices → no need for structural solutions
Poor health outcomes → personal responsibility failures → reduce healthcare
School disagreements → ideological indoctrination → remove certain curricula
Climate problems → environmental regulations → eliminate regulations
Social change → decline of tradition → return to the past
Government failures → government itself → privatize services
Media disagreement → bias → distrust all mainstream sources
Public disorder → weak policing → increase police powers
International problems → weak leadership → stronger leaders
Political problems → corrupt elites → replace the establishment
Declining community ties → loss of morality → restore old social norms
Security fears → enemy threat → preemptive strike → war
Disagreement between countries → one side is evil → confrontation → war
Resource shortages → people taking what belongs to us → seize resources
Terrorist attack or provocation → collective blame → military retaliation
The pattern you are always following can be summarized as:
Visible problem → single human cause → punishment / simple or fake solution
And this is adult thinking:
Visible problem → multiple interacting causes → systemic analysis → targeted interventions
And it's impossible to get you there on ANY subject.
Not because you are unable to, but because you have been trained
24/7 for decades to reject it.
Like what would you do to squelch irans desire or need for nuclear weapons? give them money? no cheaper than war. give them a nuclear weapon? a radical would seize it and kill us.
but just go thru 1 of them and lets see how it would work
Of course Israel claimed the opposite, but that is an obvious lie, because
they claimed for DECADES that Iran was MONTHS from having a nuke.
Only AFTER the Trump withdrew from the agreement in 2018 and reimposed sanctions, Iran gradually breached the deal’s limits, increasing uranium enrichment and expanding its nuclear capabilities.
Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA undermined US credibility and made future diplomacy harder. After proving that a signed agreement could be reversed, the US lost leverage; what is being offered now is FAR WEAKER than the strict limits and inspections the original deal achieved.
How it would work, is to NOT elect an untrustworthy FUCK-UP for president.
And that same FUCK-UP is now seeking to help Saudi Arabia develop
a civilian nuclear program, including uranium enrichment on Saudi soil, without requiring anything close to the inspection and restriction regime
that Iran accepted under the JCPOA. Do you remember that 15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers were Saudi nationals, and none were Iranians?
only registered users can see external links
Of course $75 million, a public apology, and "naturalization to this beautiful country” is in order! Perhaps the next Democrat President will make Mr. Ortiz-Vite’s demands come true!
I can understand Phart thinking like this but, you Bella? It must be getting very hot in La Belle. 😥
2013–2022 homicide convictions in Texas:
Group ---------------------- Homicide convictions ----- homicide conviction rate
Native-born Americans ---------- 7,109 ----------------- 3.0 per 100,000
Undocumented immigrants ------- 472 ----------------- 2.2 per 100,000
Legal immigrants -------------------- 336 ----------------- 1.2 per 100,000
still alive. Deny that math.
--------------------------------------- added after 23 hours
By the way, can I ask how many generations it takes to become a 'native'?
Phart, that leaves out your pet racial biased group. 🤣🤣
Our homicide/manslaughter death rate is 0.68 per 100,000. By YOUR logic,
we should ban those violent Americans from coming to our country. Fortunately,
we understand that they are freedom and science refugees, who are fleeing
a fascist regime, that they don't agree with. Still, we should vet them carefully, because it appears that lust for murder and violence is IN YOUR GENES.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Ah, maybe go back to russia and stay? Might find a big old gal in a grey dress to dominate her every night?
a spy device or the fact that most of them apparently failed those regulations?
They won't be banned, because there is no ban against putting WiFi security cameras
in every room of your house either, they just want similar network security precautions
on the robots. It sounds like common sense to me.
Possibly, you can trace this kind of regulation to a single politician, who owns such a thing, and doesn't want it to be used to uncover his dirty secrets.
only registered users can see external links
Another 1 I watched, the folks were totally just mesmerized by of all things, Ranch dressing!
This will require participating hospitals to provide personally identifiable patient information, including names, addresses, diagnoses, and other medical details, to the CPSC's contractor.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Don't expect me to defend that. The immigrants aren't welcomed with open arms
by the people who live there either. That's the people who vote for Geert Wilders.
However, what I don't get is why a software engineer from the US has to go through
Ter Apel. We have the Dutch-American Friendship Treaty (DAFT).
All an American has to do to get in is:
1. You must be a U.S. citizen.
A U.S. passport is required. Having only a U.S. green card is not enough.
2. You must start or operate your own business in the Netherlands.
This can be a sole proprietorship, a private limited company (BV), or another legitimate business structure. The business must be genuine and actively operated.
3. You must invest at least Ђ4,500 in your business.
This money is your own business capital, it is not a fee paid to the Dutch government. The funds must remain available to the business.
4. You must register your business with the Dutch Chamber of Commerce (KvK).
The business must be officially registered.
5. You must apply for a Dutch residence permit under DAFT.
The Dutch Immigration and Naturalisation Service (IND) processes the application.
6. Your business must remain active.
When you renew your residence permit, the IND will check that your business is a real, ongoing enterprise. There is no fixed minimum income requirement, but the business cannot exist only on paper.
That's why so many Americans start a YouTube channel. The money is exactly what you need for a good camera and microphone set and an editing PC with enough storage.
Then they make videos about how they love their life here.
A transgender from the US has a very slim chance to be accepted as a refugee,
because the US is considered to be a safe country.
So your story doesn't make sense. Or he is a very dumb American who didn't know that.
only registered users can see external links
every conflict?
kill people who shout at them! FUCKING FASCIST!!!
This is why you are showing that you are NOT AN AMERICAN:
1. First Amendment – Freedom of Speech
o The First Amendment protects the right to criticize the government and its officials, including police officers.
o Simply shouting, insulting, or verbally criticizing an officer is generally protected speech, unless it crosses into categories like a "true threat" or incitement.
2. Fourth Amendment – Protection Against Unreasonable Seizures
o A police shooting is considered a "seizure" of a person.
o Under Supreme Court precedent, officers may use deadly force only when it is objectively reasonable under the circumstances.
o Someone merely yelling at an officer, without posing an imminent threat of serious harm, would not justify deadly force.
3. Fifth Amendment (federal government) and Fourteenth Amendment (states)
o Both contain Due Process Clauses, which protect against deprivation of life without due process of law.
o Since most policing is done by state and local officers, the Fourteenth Amendment is especially important because it applies constitutional protections against state governments.
Key Supreme Court cases
• Tennessee v. Garner
o The Court held that police generally may not use deadly force against a fleeing suspect unless the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury.
• Graham v. Connor
o The Court established that police use of force must be judged under the Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard.
• City of Houston v. Hill
o The Court struck down a law that broadly criminalized interrupting police officers, emphasizing that the First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police.
on the inside, even withholding puberty blockers from them. Then when a trans-woman doesn't look feminine enough, your side misgenders them and makes fun of them
for being angry about it.
Would you like it, if a cop was calling you "Sir", after they were called to deal with you
because some assholes calling you "Sir" made you angry?
Yes, I'm blaming those cops for participating in your culture war.
Their job is to protect and serve, not being pawns for your politics.
Just because HE CHOOSES to wear a long hair wig and fun socks and scream in a high pitched voice does NOT make him a female/woman.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
However, there is not necessarily a single, nationwide training program in which all officers receive extensive instruction specifically about gender identity or pronoun use. The level of attention given to these topics may vary depending on the police unit, role, and training context.
In practice, officers are expected to communicate respectfully and take a person’s stated preferences into account where possible. Mistakes can happen, for example when someone’s preferred pronouns are not known or out of habit, and these are not automatically intentional. However, if someone is repeatedly or deliberately addressed incorrectly after clarifying their pronouns, they can raise the issue with the officer involved or submit a complaint to the police.
DUH!!! That's why they want to use puberty blockers; to stop looking more and more like a man, while you identify as a women. Or to stop growing tits and wide hips, if you are born as a woman, but identify as a man.
By the way, most of the gender affirming care, given to children, is for boys who have a genetic or hormone abnormality, that results in them developing breasts. Those boys are hurt by your ideology too.
Meanwhile, Pete Kegsbreath is announcing that male service members aged 30
and above should be checked to ensure they have the “right testosterone levels”
and should get testosterone treatment, if they have low levels. He is literally asking
for gender affirming care for one group, while denying it to others.
like I said ,if it looks like a duck ,it probably is 1. If police come up to a walking freak show, they should not be expected to cater to the persons ridicules appearance and actions. their job is to maintain law and ORDER. and someone like this is disrupting order and peace in the community.
Or do you think that being gay is a choice too?
You are what you are. You can chose to deny it, of course.
But why should they do that? Just because of you?
These people have development abnormalities, just like people who have other non-lethal abnormalities in their bodies. I never heard you say that someone with Autism, Cerebral palsy or Epilepsy should just ACT NORMAL, but because of some weird obsession with sex and 'sex' identity, you lot are denying THIS.
What happened in Germany is that religious and culturally inspired ignorance and hate, resulted in some fuckwit starting to kill people who are celebrating FREEDOM!!!
Persisting in the claim that it isn't real is just ignorance. To make you a bit more aware, I put below the process, as far as science has unraveled it today, of just the development of a fertilized egg into a girl/women, with all the primary and secondary sex characteristics, fertility, sexual identity and heterosexual attraction. When everything goes correctly, we get a straight cis-female/woman.
If I added the information for a boy/man, my comment would span several pages. Male development has one particularly vulnerable feature: it depends on the successful activation of the SRY → SOX9 pathway and the production and action of testicular hormones during a relatively narrow developmental window. Many chromosomal abnormalities lead to miscarriage before birth, so the patterns seen in live births don't necessarily reflect how often they occur initially. That leaves all the men with non-lethal variations in their sex/gender/sexual attraction development.
Development into a girl/woman
1. Chromosomes
Usually:
• 46 chromosomes
• XX sex chromosomes
However, simply having XX is not sufficient by itself. The genes on those chromosomes—and on the other 44 chromosomes (autosomes)—must also function normally.
There are exceptions:
• Turner syndrome (45,X)
• Mosaic XX/XO
• XX individuals with differences of sex development
• Rare XX males due to translocation of the SRY gene
So chromosomes are the starting blueprint, not the whole story.
________________________________________
2. Genes
Scientists estimate that well over 1,000 genes contribute in some way to sex differentiation, fertility, brain development, and puberty.
Only about 50–100 genes are considered major regulators of sex development.
Some of the best known include:
Ovarian development
• WNT4
• RSPO1
• FOXL2
• DAX1 (NR0B1)
These actively promote ovarian development.
________________________________________
Suppression of testis development
Female development is not simply "default."
Genes actively suppress the male pathway.
Examples:
• WNT4
• RSPO1
• FOXL2
________________________________________
Hormone production
Genes involved include:
• CYP19A1 (aromatase)
• CYP17A1
• STAR
• HSD17B enzymes
• CYP11A1
These produce estrogen and progesterone.
________________________________________
Hormone receptors
Examples:
• ESR1 (estrogen receptor alpha)
• ESR2
• PGR (progesterone receptor)
Without functioning receptors, hormones cannot work properly.
________________________________________
Fertility
Many additional genes are required.
Examples:
• FSHR
• LHCGR
• BMP15
• GDF9
• NOBOX
Hundreds more participate in ovarian function.
________________________________________
Brain development
Many genes that influence:
• hypothalamus
• limbic system
• pituitary regulation
• social behavior
also contribute indirectly.
Scientists estimate hundreds of genes are involved.
________________________________________
3. Hormones before birth (mother's womb)
Female fetal development requires relatively low androgen exposure compared with male development, but it is still hormonally regulated.
Important hormones include:
• maternal estrogens
• placental estrogens
• progesterone
• human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)
• fetal adrenal steroids
• insulin-like growth factors
• thyroid hormones
• anti-Mьllerian hormone (AMH) is generally absent at male-typical levels
Interestingly,
female internal reproductive organs develop primarily because they are not exposed to high levels of AMH and testosterone during critical developmental windows.
________________________________________
4. Hormones after birth
During childhood and especially puberty:
• estrogen
• progesterone
• FSH
• LH
• GnRH
• growth hormone
• IGF-1
• prolactin
• thyroid hormones
• adrenal hormones
work together.
________________________________________
5. Development of primary sex characteristics
Requires coordinated development of:
• ovaries
• uterus
• cervix
• vagina
• fallopian tubes
This involves:
• genes
• hormone signaling
• receptors
• embryonic tissue interactions
________________________________________
6. Secondary sex characteristics
At puberty:
• breast development
• wider pelvis
• fat distribution
• reduced muscle mass
• menstrual cycles
• body hair pattern
• voice characteristics
depend largely on estrogen and progesterone.
________________________________________
7. Fertility
Requires successful development of:
• ovaries
• follicles
• ovulation
• uterus
• endocrine cycles
• cervix
• hypothalamus
• pituitary
Hundreds of genes contribute.
________________________________________
8. Gender identity
Current evidence suggests gender identity arises from a combination of:
• genetics
• prenatal hormone exposure
• brain development
• later life experiences
Twin studies indicate a genetic contribution, but no single "gender identity gene" has been identified. Many genes likely each contribute a small effect, interacting with developmental processes.
________________________________________
9. Sexual orientation
Similarly, research suggests sexual orientation reflects:
• many genetic influences
• prenatal hormonal environment
• early brain development
• other biological factors that remain incompletely understood
Large genetic studies indicate there is no single "heterosexual gene" or "homosexual gene." Instead, many genetic variants each contribute a very small amount, alongside non-genetic developmental influences.
or baldness or a low voice or a masculine facial bone structure, and call them "SIR"?
I expect that you wouldn't. So what is it that you cannot accept that some people
have a development abnormality with their sexual attraction or sexual identity?
And yes,I have ALOT of vintage tools like being discussed,and the writer is correct,they do last much longer! only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
The problem is sourcing the info, first part is why i posted it.
When journalists are given classified information from a whistleblower, they don't trust
the whistleblower, they will verify as much of that information as possible, against other sources. I always get the impression that you have no idea how that works.
I know the person saying that. He is smart enough to understand this, which means
he has some reason to spread doubt on processes like this.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
These fuckers are giving online courses on how to trick women into being your whores
and how to get connected with powerful, wealthy and famous people. They literally stole
the EPSTEIN playbook. And who is thick as thieves with them again? TRUMP and Barron.
Also, the Tate brothers' own legal team and online right-wing commentators are reporting that Alina Habba and Marco Rubio were trying to block their extradition. Does anyone believe that they acted on their own?
Is there a point where you lot finally get the message that Trump is a sexual predator?
The Tate brothers are hugely popular with right-wingers. Are you not ashamed?
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
In Dilley, Texas, residents faced the reality of a large federal immigration detention facility in their community and many were angry that such a major decision was made with little say from local people. In California, communities and local officials also pushed back against immigration detention expansions, arguing that Washington was forcing federal policies onto their neighborhoods while ignoring their concerns.
And the pattern goes beyond immigration. Across the United States, communities have pushed back against the rapid expansion of AI data centers, complaining about noise, pollution concerns, and higher utility bills. Many residents feel that powerful corporations and governments are making decisions first and asking communities to accept the consequences afterward.
So the irony is hard to miss: people who feel ignored by their own government are appealing to a leader whose own country has citizens making the same complaint, that their voices were not heard before major decisions affecting their lives were made.
The study appears to have been performed using a legitimate scientific method and is not simply an example of cherry-picking an unusual result. The researchers used a large dataset and an established statistical approach, so the finding is worth taking seriously as a possible observation.
However, there are still important questions before accepting it as a confirmed scientific conclusion. A single study, even a large one, can produce a result that does not appear in later research. A repeat of the analysis using an independent dataset would be needed to see whether the same correlation appears again. Replication is especially important for surprising findings.
Also, a correlation does not by itself prove the cause. Even if the association between earlier sexual initiation and shorter lifespan is confirmed, it does not mean that earlier sexual activity itself causes reduced longevity. The relationship could be explained by other factors that influence both.
Possible explanations include:
• Parenting style and upbringing: people raised with more caution, planning, and risk awareness may both delay sexual activity and make healthier long-term choices.
• Socioeconomic factors: childhood poverty, education level, and access to resources may influence both age of sexual initiation and later health.
• Family stability: supportive family environments may affect both personal choices and lifelong health outcomes.
• Personality traits: characteristics such as impulsivity, risk-taking, or self-control may influence both sexual timing and health behaviors.
• Puberty and biological development: earlier physical maturation may affect both sexual timing and later biological processes.
• Stress and childhood experiences: early adversity may influence both life choices and long-term health.
• Other genetic influences: the genetic factors associated with sexual timing may also affect personality, behavior, or health through unrelated pathways.
Therefore, the current study can reasonably be viewed as evidence of an interesting association, but more research is needed to determine whether the relationship is causal and what mechanism might explain it.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
On July 13 in Biddeford, Maine, 26-year-old Colombian father Johan Sebastiбn Guerrero was shot and killed by an ICE officer while his young daughter was present. Guerrero was on his way to work and was described by neighbors as a devoted father building a life for his family.
ICE initially claimed the shooting happened during a targeted immigration operation. The agency said agents were looking for someone with a final deportation order, attempted a vehicle stop, and opened fire because the driver tried to flee and posed a danger to public safety.
That explanation quickly fell apart. Officials later confirmed Guerrero was not the person ICE was trying to arrest. He was not the target of the operation, despite ICE's initial framing making it sound as if they had confronted the person they were looking for.
The second major claim, that Guerrero used his vehicle as a weapon, has also been heavily challenged. Witness accounts, questions about the sequence of events, the lack of body-camera footage, and video evidence showing the aftermath have led critics to argue that ICE's version of events was misleading and that the agency presented a justification that does not match what later emerged.
This case has become another example of a pattern they say is deeply troubling: aggressive enforcement tactics followed by official explanations that change when outside scrutiny begins. Supporters of ICE argue that officers must be able to respond quickly when they believe there is a threat.
But the central issue remains simple: a father was killed in front of his child, and the public is demanding answers about why ICE's first explanation did not match the facts that came out afterward.
only registered users can see external links
The headline combines a confirmed event (a Houston man was killed in an ICE-involved shooting) with an unproven allegation (that he had methamphetamine in his vehicle).
The evidence does not show that the FBI has confirmed meth was found in the car.
What is confirmed
The man was Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a 52-year-old Houston construction worker and father. He was fatally shot by an ICE agent during an enforcement operation on July 7, 2026.
Federal officials said the shooting occurred after agents attempted to stop his van and alleged he used the vehicle in a threatening way. Witnesses in the van dispute that account and say the shooting was unprovoked.
Authorities have acknowledged that Salgado Araujo was not the original target of the ICE operation; DHS said he resembled the person agents were looking for.
What about the “meth in his car” claim?
The FBI obtained a search warrant based on agents’ belief that they saw “crystal-like substances” in the van that could be narcotics.
That is not the same as confirming meth was found. Reports indicate testing had not established that the substance was methamphetamine.
Salgado Araujo’s family attorney said the material was salt, reportedly used by workers as part of a homemade electrolyte mixture, not meth. Local prosecutors also said the drug claim had not been verified.
Bottom line
The statement “FBI says he had meth in his car” overstates what investigators had publicly established. A more accurate version would be:
“The FBI said agents believed they saw possible narcotics in the van and sought testing, but authorities had not publicly confirmed that the substance was methamphetamine.”
So the headline appears to turn an investigative allegation into a confirmed fact, which is not supported by the available reporting.
only registered users can see external links
I know people here do weird shit, so i thought i might save a life if I post this.
DOn't rub shit on your balls that you don't need to,it could kill you.
It's even observed behavior in great apes, that resemble showing off, competing, or taking risks in front of others, but there is no clear evidence that apes "dare" each other in the human sense. A dare requires understanding a social challenge like "I bet you won't do it" or "Prove you're brave," which depends on fairly sophisticated language and social norms.
think that's wierd,
Read about William Buckland
Are you talking about that his home filled with specimens, animal as well as mineral, live as well as dead? And that he claimed that he wanted to eat at least one individual of all animal species? A strange intention indeed. Sounds a little like some traditional Chinese medicinal practices. The underlying idea is often that an animal's characteristics can be transferred to the person consuming a particular body part. Examples include:
- Tiger bones for strength.
- Deer antlers for vitality and virility.
- Bear bile for liver or gallbladder ailments.
- Rhino horn (historically) for reducing fever, despite the horn being composed primarily of keratin, like human fingernails.
For most of human history, people had no knowledge of cells, proteins, DNA, hormones,
or biochemistry. Instead, they relied on observation, analogy, and experience. It seemed intuitive that:
- A strong animal might literally contain "strength."
- A fertile animal might confer fertility.
- A fierce predator might impart courage or aggression.
- An organ might heal the corresponding organ in humans.
This way of thinking appears independently in many cultures because it fits how humans naturally reason about the world. It's what people would call 'common sense', until it's replaced by actual knowledge and understanding.
but that's still pretty weird and disgusting.
Google "horrible food in Cambodia" and put it on images, if you have a strong stomach.
I want you to really pay attention to the story starting at 23 minutes. the whole video is worth your time, but the last bit explains why the story is not told and who gains from distorting it.
"a divided public is easy to control"
only registered users can see external links
The 'occupation' of slave might be older than the 'occupation' of prostitute.
I don't think that where it started is an argument for anything.
I just see the end as a huge step in the development of humanity.
The ones who gain from distorting the truth, are very likely disagreeing with me.
So little is taught about it, only enough to rile people up here in the US.
And the subject of repreparations is another sore spot. Who is owed? We all are if anyone is.
Even the Bible is a manual for how to treat slaves of your own tribe
and how to treat other tribes that you enslave.
Reparations are surely a sore spot for you, but for someone who wants equity,
it's simply a duty to lift up the ones who need it. That's best for everyone.
Your history was already sanitized enough, before MAGA, but that was
not pro-Murica enough. Unless they make belief that slaves were treated well,
it's called 'critical race theory' and stripped of the history books.
This is 'Why the Rest of the World Thinks Americans Are Brainwashed'.
only registered users can see external links
Like there are no completely useless idiots wearing MAGA hats.
No evidence at all that this person genuinely identifies as a communist.
When you are saying "I love communism", when you are stealing, you have NOT understood Marx's ideology. However, I'm sure she is on the left or anarchist side of politics somewhere. Since the term has been used to describe very different, and even very contradictory ideas, it's easy to use or misuse the label for almost anything.
Understand that they are not arguing that a certain principle in communist theory encourages or requires such actions. They are calling someone a communist, then claim that communism was the cause for the action, and then call communism a flawed ideology. That's circular reasoning. It's either incredibly lazy arguing or intentionally deceptive. That's however the low standard of reasoning in all the articles you are posting.
As an analogy, suppose someone stole food from a government office and posted:
"I love capitalism."
You wouldn't immediately conclude they were a committed capitalist, had studied Adam Smith, or that capitalism caused the theft. It could be sarcasm, trolling, a joke, or a genuine belief. You'd want more evidence before drawing conclusions about their political identity.
By the way, if you are working for DoorDash, you are going hungry anyway.
This law needs to be brought back up, revised and a constitutional amendment made to cover communism and socialism before it gets out of control.
Socialism means publicly controlled and publicly owned.
Capitalism means owned by a small minority of wealthy people.
Ownership means power. Why do you want to give all the power away to wealthy people?
The last remaining systems that are any good in your country are publicly funded.
Almost everything that has been privatized has turned to shit for the users and a
tool to extract money from the pockets of the users into the pockets of the owners.
"before it gets out of control." OMG you crazy person, there is hardly any communism
or socialism left. Almost everything has been capitalized.
You are lucky that you don't have to pay some company for the air you are breathing YET.
Have you considered how capitalism could get out of control?
Tell me what that would look like. Show me that you have the mental exploration power.
Who says I don't have to pay for the air I breath?
Try not paying taxes on your property such as your home, you would loose it, you are paying for the air you breath.
Capitalism out of control> ha, has it ever been? I doubt it ,that is the beauty of it, the consumer is in control.
If you look at the Marxist idea of communism, it means the absence of a state; classless, stateless, and based on common ownership rather than state ownership.
When YOU are talking about 'communism', you mean authoritarian, centralized, government ownership.
I am definitely not a communist by that definition. I think that a government is useful.
It's very hard to organize effective cooperation without some form of government.
Is it really that difficult for you to imagine your preferred system going to an extreme
that you wouldn't like?
The consumer is ONLY in control if there are many protections in place. The current type of capitalism is creating monopolies, in which the consumer has NO choice at all.
--------------------------------------- added after 24 hours
Here's an idea of a sign that capitalism is out of control;
your Environmental Protection Agency deciding that companies can just pollute the water and air as much as they want with forever chemicals and heavy metals that cause cancer, birth defects and cause severe neurological damage in the brain.
only registered users can see external links
In many countries, cultures have evolved and become richer through the exchange
of ideas, customs, and traditions. The real challenge is balancing social cohesion with cultural diversity, not choosing one at the expense of the other.
One passage is doing more than talking about "culture", it is primarily arguing for representation, familiarity, and a sense of belonging. Notice the examples the author gives:
- Reading books by Black authors.
- Watching films made by or about Black people.
- Attending a historically Black church.
- Making Blackness feel like "home" rather than something encountered once a year.
Their culture from Africa was already taken from them, by the slave owners. What is considered black culture, has only developed during that period and what came after. The black church is Christian, a religion that was forced upon them. Gospel music comes from slaves who were singing while doing backbreaking work, to make it more bearable. Their food traditions ("soul food") comes from the skill of making animal feed edible.
The article says: "Please, for the love of all things holy, don’t let your child’s exposure to Black culture begin and end with Black History Month.". I agree with that. They should be represented every day of the year.
Meanwhile, your administration is trying to erase not just Black History Month, but every book by a black author or with a black character in it. You are trying to erase their history in your country. Your administration is kicking out black people from all leadership positions and trying to make it impossible for them to elect black representation.
You want to completely erase their own identity, while you simultaneously expect them to accept that they don't have the same value as you. You want them to accept that American history is WHITE history. That's what you mean with "the loss of their culture".
only registered users can see external links
I don't blame companies for doing what profits them most either,
I'm blaming the working class for not standing up to them.
We didn't get good contracts, retirements, investments in employee development, etc, because companies cared about us, we got that, because we forced them to provide it.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Well, actually it can, but I'm of the opinion that it shouldn't.
I don't know your experience with digital video games, but some are the opposite
of mind numbing.
- Games require active thinking, not passive consumption.
- Players solve problems, make decisions, and adapt to new situations.
- They develop cognitive skills such as planning, memory, attention, spatial reasoning, and strategic thinking.
- Many games promote deep focus ("flow"), a state of intense concentration rather than mental disengagement.
- Multiplayer games build social skills through teamwork, communication, and coordination.
- Creative games encourage design and experimentation, allowing players to build, invent, and explore.
The effects depend on the game and how it's played. Some games are intellectually demanding, while others are more relaxing or repetitive.
Research doesn't support the blanket claim that video games are mind numbing;
instead, benefits and drawbacks depend on the type of game and the amount of time spent playing.