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.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 2.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF III 4.Be honest!! 5.Is this about you 🤷♂️, those that live in glass houses should not throw stones.
only registered users can see external links
People given everything they need and more from the tax payers pockets and do nothing, have no reason to change their ways. no motivation, no desire to do better. Because they don't give a damn.
Toxic masculinity, i hear that word alot lately. The new liberal idea is to make being a actual MAN and standing up for yourself and your family and what you believe into being toxic and terrible and shouldn't be allowed. you are supposed to be a humanoid being with a penis that cry's when your latte is not warm enough and you are supposed to drive a pink prius and never be proud of yourself, your accomplishments ,never have any goals or desire to achieve. Liberals just want you to be a useless bag of water with a phallus. that's the liberal definition of a man nowadays.
You're sounding like your country is some sort of socialist Utopia, where people don't need to work to stay alive. Who in his right mind can still think that? When you need to feed kids in school, because they are hungry, that's not 'socialism', that's a sign that your people are HURTING. Their parents are working their asses off, but their employers don't pay them enough, their landlords are taking all their money, so they don't have any left for food, to feed their children. That shouldn't be fixed with taxes, that should be fixed by reducing the EXPLOITATION SYSTEM.
How do people need to do better? Work harder for their employer? They will love it, but won't pay a cent more. How about education? Trump is destroying schools as we speak. No one can afford to go to school anymore.
Standing up for yourself and your family is NOT "Toxic masculinity", that's a stupid
straw-man. Treating women like slaves and whores is "toxic masculinity". That is what your manosphere influencers are supporting. What they are also supporting is millions for them and obedient servitude for all their followers. They are telling them the same fantasy that you believe, but that's not how they get rich. They got rich by selling a lie, like every other scammer who profits from people's misery. It's millionaires lying for billionaires.
Not everyone can get rich from spouting propaganda on the internet. Some people
need to do actual work.
Do you remember who those "essential workers" were, during Covid?
Those jobs still don't pay shit. We cannot all be managers, business people,
stock traders and infuencers. We DON'T all need to "improve" ourselves,
every job is important to keep the economy growing and progressing.
And everyone who contributes to that should be able to make a good living
for their family. That's not a privilege, that's what we ALL deserve.
The people who are privileged are the people who are born with a silver spoon
in their mouth, thinking they deserve to have more than everyone else, by birth-right.
Why do stupid people always flip that around?
Why isn't it obvious to you what they are doing?
YOU ARE INDOCTRINATED BY THE WEALTHY WHO OWN YOU!
never having done anything positive for anyone else,
but only served your own wealth and power,
and then getting elected for POTUS,
because people like your hate and bullshit.
Since you are so keen into United States politics, please share which one of our CAREER POLITICIANS you feel has deserved to become President.
Perhaps this is like comparing apples to oranges but if possible, would you care to share what your royal family has done for your country?
Why do you think that a billionaire nepo-baby would make a better president
than a career politician? Do either care about YOU?
It's your stupid corrupt system that churns out 'career politicians'.
I want real REPRESENTATIVES, from working class families,
who gained knowledge and experience and then go into politics
to improve the system for YOU, because they still understand people like YOU.
People like Trump only understand how to USE people like YOU.
What does Trump say about someone from a poor family who goes into politics?
When they support the working class, he treats them like GARBAGE.
That should be enough for you to understand the problem.
My royal family doesn't have ANY power. They are just well-payed mascots
and diplomats. They serve the same purpose as the national soccer team.
But i am waiting to hear which of our folks you think should be or deserves to be president. I bet it will be some left wing nut job.
I don't ignore your words, i just don't agree with them most of the time. You do take time to explain why you feel the way you do and some of it makes sense, that is why i try to refrain from calling you vile names and such.. and trust me, this is not the only place i argue and you have really sharpened my pencil. I even got banned from 1 local web site because i was just to uh, honest in how i felt about things. but i had alot of folks agreeing with me.
Not even ALL of them? Damn, that's Freudian slip, if I ever heard one.
No, Trump is more damaging than all welfare recipients put together.
He is currently putting your country into STAGFLATION. He is destroying the relationship with every other country, without even succeeding in befriending the horrible dictators that he likes so much. Your country has been failing for a while,
but he is accelerating it. This will be you, once you finally realize it:
Tweeting and destroying is 'doing things', but even you cannot call it 'working'.
Bernie Sanders should have been president. He has worked his ass off for working class people for DECADES. He is not a hateful, selfish buffoon like Trump. He has worked with everyone on both sides, if they were honestly willing to improve anything for normal Americans. You can only think of the left as 'nut jobs', because that's the right-wing indoctrination inoculation against the truth. Try to show them wrong.
You didn't react to ANYTHING in that post. Don't you even notice?
Why do you think that a billionaire nepo-baby makes a better president
than a career politician? If a politician has a long career doesn't that mean
that their constituents keep voting for them? Is that bad, by definition?
At least they understand how to write laws and they have seen how it worked out.
Why would that be a negative thing? Would you say the same about a carpenter
or a truck driver? Why is it good to pick amateurs to organize the country?
You are only saying that, because your subconsciously noticing the horrible corruption in your country, and you're associating it with all politicians. The longer they stay, the worse they must be. There is NO REASON to it. A newcomer could easily be much worse. They could have lots of selfish reasons to go into politics. They often have a big company that is having problems with regulation or competition. When they have destroyed the regulation or the competition, they bugger off again, or go look for other deals to personally profit from. That's not what politicians should do. They shouldn't
be working to shape the country towards their own benefit, they should be working
FOR THE PEOPLE. They should solve YOUR problems, not their own problems.
You do ignore anything that you cannot argue against. When I can show you evidence, to justify my point, you just ignore that I'm right and move on to the next point. Then a few days later, you come back to the point I showed you are wrong on before. If you can show mt facts to be incorrect, or my argumentation to be fallacious, I will correct myself. It's just really rare that you are correct on a fact or on the logic leading to a conclusion.
If there are lots of people agreeing with you, that just means that it's an echo chamber, it doesn't mean that you are correct.
Kamalla harris would have been terriable for America. Being white single and male is already sin enough as it is in 2025, she would have made it worse.
As for breaking relations with most of our "friends" I will say this, i think most of our so called friends are fair weather friends or just bumming off of us.
Trump destroyed DEI, fired many black people with lots of experience
and replace them with stupid, drunk, racist white BOYS. That's DEI.
Yes, you think that, because Trump TOLD YOU. You don't have good reasons.
Meanwhile, your country has the highest GDP in the world and controls all new media, so it couldn't be all that bad. The fact that the American people are not feeling the wealth, is your own choice, you're all serving the wealthy.
That you have 200 military bases in the world, was to serve your own interests,
like stealing all the resources from poor people, that wasn't because other countries asked you to do that. The whole world is/was using the dollar, which made your country too big to fail. That also mostly serves your wealthy people, but all of that is your own fault. And you're now not correcting your fault, you're doubling and tripling down on it. Everything that Trump is doing or trying is worsening the problem.
Dei was designed to get a certain number of colors and races in spots in all positions. the problem was, some were not qualified for the jobs.but were there because they met other criteria .
All the problems you have with them are caused by your actions.
They are still suffering from inequality, because you didn't accept them as equal.
DEI was giving people more opportunities to show themselves qualified,
but people like you cannot handle it, when a black person gets the job
that you think you are entitled to. A small person then thinks that the other person wasn't even qualified. Just little white snowflakes.
About 90% of Trump's administration consists of dumb-ass amateurs.
No black person in any of those positions ever fucked-up like them.
Your MAGA culture just worships stupidity, there is no other explanation.
Qualifications are what matter to me. I had a white helper on the job that somehow graduated high school and couldn't read. I complained until I was blue in the face with no results because he was related to 1 of the boss's. Well, when i came back from a vacation trip, the helper was GONE. I was like ,Ah, nice, what finally happened. They found out he did not meet the qualifications of the job, 1 of which was reading and writing. nothing to do with color, it is about can they do the job well.
The other thing you are describing is nepotism. That's completely separate from what you are describing as some black preference. Management doesn't have an incentive to appoint people who are unqualified, unless it benefits their own family. One exception; when the person who seems unqualified is also much cheaper, that is also an incentive for management. They are not always picking quality over cost. If you need to promote someone with an already high paycheck, that is expensive. If they can get away with a kid with no experience, but who will work their ass off, that is cheap and maybe it will work out.
You are forgetting that. Do I have to explain that your principles might clash
with an employer's principles?
CAT might be better than Trump and Biden, but most people don't know her.
How about someone who everyone knows and respects?
MAGA is literally supporting to have some 'benevolent dictator' who is voted in and then never have elections again. If you don't trust presidents now, would you trust one that you can never vote out?
The idea of your Constitution was that the president is just some moderator,
to control the debate between the parties and to sign the end result, when the process was performed well. The term 'president' has Latin roots, prae- (meaning before) + sedere (meaning to sit), so "president" originally meant "the one who presides over a meeting or assembly.". It was not originally a title of great power, but rather someone who oversaw or chaired a gathering. However,your presidents have been attracting lots of power, mostly because Congress was to ineffective to make choices. Your Republicans have now completely turned it to a fucking mess, allowing Trump to do almost everything with emergency decrees and executive actions. The Supreme Court is setting some limits, but mostly they'll allow it, because they are by majority partisan conservatives, who don't care that The Founding Fathers
are rolling around in their graves at 10,000 rpm.
How about going back to a president who is just a chair person, with
elected representatives in Congress making laws and voting for them, and
a Supreme Court that is just checking whether the law is being followed?
It wasn't until Buckley v. Valeo (1976), that the Supreme Court ruled that limits on how much a candidate can spend of their own money on political donations (to prevent corruption) are unconstitutional, since spending is a form of free speech.
Presidents were already taking more power before 1925.
Below is a whole list. Why pick 1925?
Do you think everything was better in 1925?
How about the stupidity that caused the Great Depression?
Do you prefer to eliminate the corruption that suits your views?
Don't you like it that billionaires control your politics?
It has served your political agenda.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Andrew Jackson (actually before Lincoln, but foundational, 1829–1837)
Aggressively used the veto not just on constitutional grounds but as a policy tool.
Positioned himself as the direct representative of the people against Congress.
Set an early precedent for a more assertive presidency.
2. Abraham Lincoln (1861–1865)
Civil War emergency powers: suspension of habeas corpus, unilateral military spending, Emancipation Proclamation.
Established that presidents could stretch constitutional authority in crises.
3. Theodore Roosevelt (1901–1909)
“Stewardship theory”: the president could do anything not explicitly forbidden by the Constitution.
Used executive orders aggressively to regulate corporations and protect natural resources.
Expanded U.S. global role (e.g., Panama Canal, “big stick” diplomacy) with little congressional input.
4. Woodrow Wilson (1913–1921)
Transformed the president into the legislative agenda-setter, giving the State of the Union as a personal speech.
During WWI, centralized wartime authority (propaganda, industry control).
Pushed the idea of the U.S. president as a world leader (League of Nations).
5. Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933–1945)
The biggest expansion of presidential power in U.S. history.
New Deal: unprecedented use of executive agencies to regulate the economy.
WWII: near-total centralization of foreign and military policy in the White House.
Broke the 2-term precedent (served 4 terms).
After him, Congress passed the 22nd Amendment (1951) to limit presidential terms.
6. Cold War Presidents (Truman → Reagan, 1945–1989)
Truman: asserted the power to commit U.S. troops abroad without a declaration of war (Korea).
National Security Act of 1947: created the CIA, NSC, DoD — permanent national security state under presidential control.
Nixon: pushed executive privilege and secrecy to extremes (though Watergate led Congress to claw back some power in the 1970s).
Reagan: expanded use of executive agreements and covert operations (Iran-Contra).
7. Post–Cold War to War on Terror (1990s–2000s)
Clinton: normalized executive policymaking through regulation when Congress was gridlocked.
George W. Bush: after 9/11, claimed sweeping “unitary executive” powers — indefinite detentions, surveillance, military action (Iraq & Afghanistan) with minimal congressional declarations.
Obama: expanded drone strike authority, unilateral action on immigration (DACA), and continued broad surveillance.
8. Recent Presidents (Trump & Biden)
Trump: declared a national emergency to redirect funds to build the border wall; pushed boundaries of executive orders; challenged congressional oversight.
Biden: heavy reliance on executive action for climate, student loans, and foreign affairs when Congress is gridlocked.
Trump is doing now almost everything with emergency powers and executive actions. Even his own Supreme Court justices are now getting to the end of their patience. He is also abusing his presidential immunity. Ordering to blow up a boat with 11 civilians, in international waters, is murder, even if they are smuggling drugs. The president doesn't have the power to order this. Both Congress and the Supreme Court should act now, because Trump is just testing the waters and moving the goalposts, to do the same to American citizens that he considers to be criminals.
Will you just take his word for it then? What am I asking...
When they support the working class, he treats them like GARBAGE.
That should be enough for you to understand the problem.”
Again, I acknowledge that your are far more intelligent than I and I also concede, far more versed on politics relating to my country than I am. Specifically, who has Donald Trump as the President of the United States OR Donald Trump, as a “billionaire nepotism-baby” said about a poor person that has entered the political ring?
of the Netherlands. There was a fun LEGO® Art Exhibit too.
You're kidding right? He thinks poor people are waste.
You yourself think poor people are waste.
You think they are lazy moochers and a waste of money.
It's burned into your brain so deep, that you don't even notice.
And Trump is affirming that every time he speaks, without you even noticing.
"People given everything they need and more from the tax payers pockets and do nothing, have no reason to change their ways. no motivation, no desire to do better. Because they don't give a damn."
You think "burger flippers" should not be paid a living wage.
You think they are too lazy to better themselves. How should they do that?
Where should they get the money for school or investments,
while they work 60 hrs per week to afford a shitty apartment?
At best they get some on the job course for team-leader.
How many people are working some shit job, just to pay the bills?
Tell me, what do they need to do, "to do better"?
What if they have an IQ of 80? Never a living wage for that guy?
Your right-wing media is pissing on the poor on a daily basis too.
That's where you get your hate of poor people from, it's by example.
They are all millionaires and they think poor people are waste.
They are now even suggesting to just kill homeless people. Did you hear?
Do you remember saying that you don't have any money to spend on poor people
in other countries, as long as there are still homeless people in the US?
You're not the only one to say it either.
So, are you spending any money on helping the homeless now?
or the ones who are not interested to hear anything they don't agree with.
You are actually making me put my money where my mouth is. I love it!
Trump: “My entire life, I’ve watched politicians bragging about how poor they are, how they came from nothing, how poor their parents and grandparents were. And I said to myself, if they can stay so poor for so many generations, maybe this isn’t the kind of person we want to be electing to higher office. How smart can they be? They’re morons.”
Trump: “I love all people, rich or poor, but in those particular positions, I just don’t want a poor person.”
[What is he saying? If you come from poor parents, you must be stupid, because
your parents are stupid for being poor, so you have 'stupid genes'. He is clearly arguing against your 'American dream'. I am doing that too, but in a different way.
I am saying the odds are stacked against a poor person making it big.]
Question: How smart do you need to be, to keep a fortune paying out for you indefinitely? How much work does it take?
My answer: You just pick the best people to handle it for you.
Of course you don't trust just one. Is that very difficult? A lot of work?
(One 'stable genius' hired Michael Cohen, to break the law for him.)
Don't you remember him scolding AOC like a million times for having been poor?
“The Green New Deal … done by a young bartender, 29 years old.”
“Instead of her constant complaining, Alexandria should go back home to Queens … and straighten out her filthy, disgusting, crime ridden streets, in the District she ‘represents,’ and which she never goes to anymore.”
[What is he saying? Go feed some soup to the homeless, instead of involving yourself in the big decisions that touch the lives of all Americans, of which half are at least struggling to make ends meet. You need to be rich to decide anything for them.]
“How dare ‘The Mouse’ tell us how to run the United States of America!”
It's not just him, your whole party shits on the poor. It's Republican culture.
I'm amazed how many poor people vote for a party that hates them
and doesn't want any of them even near positions of influence.
Did you never notice any of your politicians making a point out of AOC having worked in a restaurant? How about making a fuzz about her now spending good money on a hair-dresser or a dress? Or did you think: "Yeah, what was this poor Mexican girl thinking, when she got into politics. It's a job for rich white men, to decide where
our government spends all our money."?
Trump, other politicians and your media are directly arguing that she doesn't have a right to complain that poor people have it tough, because she was poor and got out. Do you agree with that idea? Who would be a better representative of poor people,
a previously poor person who has some money now or a born-rich person? (bella!)
Have you ever heard anyone on your side making a fuzz about some rich bitch spending money on her hair or clothes? It's acceptable for all your politicians who grew up in a wealthy family, isn't it? When do you hear the same about a politician who was born rich or had 3 businesses and millions in stocks, before they became
a politician?
I had no idea they actually paid out.
So this is news to me that people were actually getting money.
only registered users can see external links
You think that a company that can advertise about doing exactly that,
would be allowed to never even pay a cent?
There are government agencies that investigate claims like that.
Well, maybe the agency that did that is destroyed by Trump now, so yes,
you can NOW assume that companies that make such claims are scamming you.
only registered users can see external links
Pretty smile, but must be a REAL wacko.
And the boyfriend must have had a HARD head.
only registered users can see external links
What the evidence shows:
Contemporary accounts: People close to him (like his secretaries and chefs) said that for much of his later life, especially during and after the late 1930s, he mostly avoided meat. His personal chef, Dione Lucas, mentioned he had a strong aversion to meat dishes and preferred things like mashed potatoes, vegetables, and soups.
Health reasons: Some historians think his diet was influenced more by chronic digestive issues and health concerns than by ethics. He had stomach problems and relied on a personal physician who put him on restrictive diets.
Inconsistencies: Earlier in his life, Hitler did eat meat (including sausages and liver dumplings, which he reportedly liked). There are also accounts suggesting he occasionally broke his vegetarian habits, eating meat broth or even ham.
Propaganda factor: The Nazis liked to portray Hitler as a disciplined, pure-living figure, which included highlighting his supposed vegetarianism, teetotalism, and non-smoking. This was part of building his cult of personality.
Bottom line:
Hitler was not a lifelong vegetarian. From the late 1930s onward, he seems to have mostly avoided meat, but it wasn’t consistent, and it was likely for health and image reasons rather than ethical ones.
Animal welfare under the Nazis:
1933 Animal Protection Law (Tierschutzgesetz): Shortly after the Nazis came to power, they passed one of the most progressive animal welfare laws of the time. It restricted vivisection (animal experiments), regulated hunting, banned boiling lobsters alive, and sought to limit animal suffering in slaughter.
Rhetoric: Hitler and other Nazi leaders sometimes spoke about compassion for animals. Hitler himself reportedly said he opposed hunting and vivisection. Hermann Gцring even threatened to send people who violated vivisection rules to concentration camps (though this was more about projecting Nazi “morality” than consistent enforcement).
Reality check: In practice, the laws were inconsistently enforced. They served propaganda purposes — showing Germany as “humane” — while the same regime inflicted horrific cruelty and violence on humans.
Like the guy starts to say when the vid cuts off, even a broken clock is right 2 times a day.
Hitler brought about several things that are common place today.
Al copones Cadillac later became the first presidential limo because it was bullet proof and was handy for the president to make the speech declaring war on japan for pearl harbor.
Can you give me an example of what Trump has delivered, that will be common place
in 80 years?
Listen; fascism HAS the ability to unite a country, it's after-all based on nationalism.
That will result in some creations that stand the test of time. That doesn't make the fascism OK, because it's based on DIVISION. How about UNIFICATION to actually make the world better? Hurting scapegoats does NOT solve problems.
Or do you think that the Jews were the problem and Germany improved itself
from blaming and then exterminating the Jews?
Solving the actual problems solves problems, without the VICTIMS.
Is this some 'far left lunacy' or can you at least see that?
only registered users can see external links
Can you imagine sitting on a toilet so long you have to have the seat removed from your body???and loose use of your legs because of itt?
I do think the guy was a bit stupid. why would you leave someone sitting on a shitter that long? even adults do stupid stuff and have to be reigned in once in a while.
Come to think of it, those 2 must not have had much of a sex life or he was off screwing someone else. can you imagine, " wheres your girlfriend?" sitting on the toilet, " for 2 years!????" yep, lets screw
--------------------------------------- added after 2 hours
cat? Help us out, 1 or 2 baths?
can a gun in a drawer shoot on it's own?
No, a gun in a drawer cannot shoot on its own. Firearms require an external force to operate, typically a human pulling the trigger, which initiates the firing mechanism. For a gun to discharge, several conditions must be met:
Loaded Chamber: The gun must have a round in the chamber.
Trigger Activation: The trigger must be pulled with sufficient force to engage the firing mechanism (e.g., releasing the hammer or striker to strike the primer of the cartridge).
Mechanical Failure or External Force: In extremely rare cases, a malfunction (e.g., a faulty sear or drop safety failure) combined with a significant external force—like a strong impact—could theoretically cause a discharge. However, modern firearms are designed with safety mechanisms (e.g., drop safeties, trigger safeties) to prevent accidental firing even if dropped or jarred.
A gun simply sitting in a drawer lacks the energy or mechanism to spontaneously fire. Environmental factors like heat, vibration, or magnets cannot activate a trigger or ignite ammunition under normal conditions. Ammunition requires a precise strike to the primer, which only the gun’s firing mechanism can deliver.
If a gun is stored unloaded (no round in the chamber) and with proper safety measures (e.g., trigger lock or safe storage), the risk of accidental discharge is effectively zero. Even in cases of mechanical defects, spontaneous firing without human intervention or extreme external force is virtually impossible.
"Hey Grok, Can a depressed man, who doesn't own a gun and doesn't have one near him, shoot his brains out on a whim?"
"No, a depressed man who doesn’t own a gun and doesn’t have one near him cannot shoot himself on a whim. Without access to a firearm, it’s physically impossible to carry out such an act impulsively. If you or someone you know is struggling with depression or suicidal thoughts, reaching out to a trusted person or a professional resource like a crisis hotline (e.g., 988 in the U.S.) can provide immediate support."
"Thanks Grok! How about pills? This guy on the internet took my will to live, with his
brain-dead nonsense..."
"I’m really sorry to hear you’re feeling this way—internet nonsense can be exhausting, can’t it? To answer your question, a depressed person without access to pills (like prescription or over-the-counter drugs in sufficient quantity) couldn’t impulsively overdose, just as they couldn’t use a gun without one nearby. It requires having the means readily available, and even then, it’s not a simple or inevitable act.
More importantly, it sounds like you’re hurting, and I want to help. If someone online is dragging you down, it might help to step away from the screen for a bit or talk it out with someone you trust. Those brain-dead comments don’t define your worth. If you’re feeling overwhelmed, a hotline like 988 (in the U.S.) or a similar service in your area can offer a listening ear, no judgment. Want to share more about what’s got you feeling this way?
I’m here to listen."
you would have to nail his door shut
That would be the last thing that I would do. However, I can't imagine any of it.
It also leaves some time to come to your senses. Picking up a gun and blowing your brains out can be done in seconds, AKA 'on a whim'. Finding a good spot to run under
a truck or train takes longer, maybe hours. The walk alone good help settle emotions.
That suicide can also hurt other people. Many people still care about that, when they
are killing themselves. It's something that survivors of suicides say they struggled with. Obviously, we can't ask the ones who were successful.
There are many ways to kill yourself and many ways to kill someone else, but none are so convenient and effective as using a gun.
I was surprised that only 55% of suicides in the US involved guns though.
Personally, I would prefer it over the other popular methods.
Suffocation / Hanging: ~27%
Poisoning (including drugs/overdose, chemicals, gases): ~11%
Other methods (jumping, cutting, etc.): ~7%
Damn, we're going down a very dark hole now. See what you did.
slitting the wrist is the next up thing women do, if they cut it in line with the blood vessel,it is more difficult to stop the bleeding, she tried that a year before the last attempt,2 inch cut along the main vessel, just a few more minutes and she woulda bled dry.
and here is the part you won't believe, she had access to guns of all sorts, and chose a knife and pills instead.
when she slit her wrist, she did it alone,and had cussed me out and told me to go away and stay gone. the neighbor came over to borrow a movie to watch and saw her in a pool of blood. i think she was done with life. she is now in the care of the state and is usually tied to the bed because she is so violent if they try to get her off meds
Damn, she would have been better off dead. Are you calling this the
"CARE of the state"?
Is this how you want a modern society to handle mental patients?
You are talking about mental hospitals a lot.
And now you are telling me this story?!?!
I have no words.
an admission of a failed system, from a country that doesn't want to invest
in humane mental healthcare.
About a decades ago we had stories in the media of a mental patient who was treated this way. It became a massive scandal, national outrage, investigations by the IGJ, a parliamentary debate, and ultimately reforms to help curb such coercive practices.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
We don't except society treating anyone like this. It should only be used very short-term for very extreme cases. A wealthy country should be able to prevent these cases. That's what we expect from humanity. Phart expects the opposite. He wants people treated like that, if they only pose some danger to him.
I think that's a clear case of a difference in morality.
I realize Ananas is thinking of a screaming helpless person tied to a bed wanting a cracker as being the inhumane situation that it appears to be. But what is more humane? Leaving a crazy person loose on the streets to hurt others, or keep them put away? Innocent people get hurt and killed all the time by crazy people on pills that even the dr's don't know how they work.
And a person like this can't be expected to make a wise decision on rather they want to die or not. I mean, gee they are mentally ill.
Do you really care about innocent people get hurt and killed?
I have not seen many examples of you really caring about people.
At the very least, there is a whole lot of people you care 0% about.
To me, it's just a principle, simply the 'golden rule':
V1) “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
V2) “What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others.”
V3) “Treat others the way they would like to be treated.”
Or just how Mahatma Gandhi said it: “The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members.”
Or Hubert Humphrey (U.S. Vice President, 1977–1981), who in a 1977 speech said: “The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.”
But now the crazys about out number the sane. the problem has been glossed over until it is all but mainstream. And yet ,people are wondering what is wrong!!
To many asylums closed. beautiful buildings rotting down, that served a great purpose. Of course there was abuse, people get angry when their hard work is ignored or people disobey or attempt harm. some people get lost on the revenge wagon. but for the most part, these places need to be refurbished and filled to capacity.
only registered users can see external links
A fitting explanation for Trump's presidency.
Yes, here is how you judge this: what would you want for YOURSELF.
If I had to exist strapped down to a bed, I would want to be DEAD.
If I needed to be drugged out of my mind, I would want to be DEAD.
you are forgetting, we are not talking about logical,sane people here, we are talking about people that are nuts beyond function
I would prefer to be death, because there would be no hope.
There is no way to convince me that there is a mental state where people prefer to be strapped down or being completely sedated, instead of getting anything better. This is purely a case of cost vs care.
There is only one mental state where people prefer to be cared for as cheaply as possible, instead of with empathy and sympathy, and that's what you are indoctrinated to want for people. Your cult celebrates cruelty, not just for terrorists, criminals, illegals, drug-addicts, Palestinians, the poor, the mentally ill, the minorities, people with other political opinions or women, but even for yourself.
You think human rights are nonsense. To you, the tiniest sliver of lack of
self-responsibility equals a justification for elimination.
You don't see a need to minimize cruelty, to achieve a goal, as long as
you think that the goal is justified.
I asked ChatGPT to determine your ideology on these values. It calls it: Totalitarian mindset / Machiavellian amorality.
I call it 'mental illness'. Maybe we should put you away to protect society.
Just a nice, clean apartment, without any sharp objects to hurt people with.
The door doesn't even need to be locked, security will safely contain you.
Here is 1 of your shining stars and the death he caused.
You cannot predict who will do this.
If you allow the government to lock people up as a precaution,
you allow them to lock up ANYONE THEY WANT.
You are asking to give up all of your freedoms, for the idea of safety.
Well, they are prepared to TAKE your freedoms, for the idea of safety.
But, you are not willing to give up your idea of safety, for actual safety.
I'm not willing to sacrifice my actual safety for the idea of safety.
I'm not willing to sacrifice my freedom for either.
You are sacrificing everyone's freedom, because you want to FEEL safe.
Guns are not actual safety, they provide you with the IDEA of safety.
In actuality, America's gun addiction makes everyone more UNSAFE.
Nowhere else in the modern world are people being killed even near
as much as in your country.
"
The man who is accused of fatally stabbed a Ukrainian refugee on a Charlotte, North Carolina, train can be heard saying "I got that white girl" while other passengers sat and stood by."
only registered users can see external links
Sharp objects (e.g., knives) account for about 8.1% of homicides.
You can of course mix in the race card. Most homicides in the US are committed by Black/African Americans. It's only logical that people who are growing up way more often in poor, dangerous communities, with much less chances to make it, will be over-represented in homicide and other crime statistics.
If you wanted to solve that, you would need DEI. However, you prefer to never solve any problems and vote for people who just mirror your anger about those problems and blame the victims.
Name one solution that your MAGA politicians have proposed to reduce crime, without being cruel to anyone, take freedoms away from anyone
or reduce the quality of life of anyone.
No one should give 2 shits about the freedoms of a criminal.
Article I
Section 9
"The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."
"No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
Section 10
"No State shall ... pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law..."
Article III
Section 2
"The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed."
Section 3
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
"The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."
Amendments
Amendment IV
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Amendment V
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Amendment VI
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
Amendment VIII
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
Amendment XIII, Section 1
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
Amendment XIV, Section 1
"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
I know you would stand back and let a thug kill off your entire family without lifting a finger and offer them a cup of tea with some truffles but that is just not the nature of some people.
I know that is a stretch but your mindset sure does convey that message.
I just can't see how you justify leaving dangerous people loose and think it is ok for others to feel threatened all the time.
The ideas you help to spread and normalize are an inspiration
to many crazies, who do lots of harm.
Those ideas helped elect Trump, who is doing lots of harm.
You are supporting a genocide.
You are supporting Putin's propaganda, to further his imperialist goals.
You are supporting the kidnapping of innocent people to prison camps.
You are supporting arbitrary detention of vulnerable people.
You are supporting the elimination of healthcare for many people.
You are supporting the return of almost eradicated infectious diseases.
You are supporting the cancellation of crucial medical research.
You are supporting that under@ge r@pe victims don't get justice.
You are supporting government control over women's bodies.
You are supporting the destruction of a social safety net that many people rely on.
You are supporting the destruction of an independent constitutional state.
You are supporting the destruction of free and fair elections.
You are supporting the destruction of freedom of speech.
You are supporting the destruction of independent education.
You are supporting the destruction of just plain old decency in politics.
You never present a solution for the abuse of social safety nets.
I want independant education. I want parents to be able to send their kids to the schools of their choice. Private schools would offer better choices and better quality education than public.
several others of that list are wrong. you just can't see but 1 solution and that is to leave a corrupt socialist government in charge of everything important in our lives.
And you are SO naive if you trust the government with your safety. you may as well bungie jump every day off a bridge,
that requires more money.
We differ in opinion on what abuse of social safety nets would be.
To me, they are a tool to achieve more equality, to benefit everyone.
For as much as you are referring to real fraud, that's mostly a lie from people who want to destroy social safety nets.
Parents are not the only ones who should have freedom in education and religion, so should children. Children should be protected from the most extreme delusions of their parents, whether they may be extremely religious, extremely conservative or extremely 'woke'. Your views are not the average of the American public, so education shouldn't just bow to your will. The choice should be limited to at maximum varying mildly around the middle.
Private schools only provide better quality at much higher costs. Most people cannot afford that, so public education should be the standard.
What reason do you have to add corrupt to 'socialist government in charge'? Your capitalist system is incredibly corrupt.
You still don't fucking understand the term 'socialist'.
You still think it's the same as 'communist'. Will you ever learn?
The term 'socialist' means owned and controlled by ALL the people.
The term 'communist' means owned and controlled by the government.
The term 'capitalist' means owned and controlled by a wealthy minority.
In both communism and capitalism, the people are trusting a minority to handle their best interests, in socialism we maximize democratic control
to best serve our interests by means of compromise. That means that I would trust YOU more to find a solution together, than I trust some ruling elites to power over me. That reduces the division in a country, because the elites intentionally divide the people, to serve themselves.
Private schools are capitalist schools. They are owned by companies, investors or wealthy owners. The owners control and shape it to serve THEM, not the people for who it is intended. That's corruption, by definition.
Socialist education would mean that we all pay for it through taxes. We all have a voice in how to shape it, so it benefits all of us. We, the people, will prevent it from getting corrupted, with our combined voice.
I DON'T trust the government. I am not a communist, I am a SOCIALIST.
I trust that people can work out their problems best together, instead of handing over our power to one dictator or a group of ruling elites.
That's because one person or a small group of people can inflict too much damage with that power. We cannot of course do politics with 17 million (or in your case 330 million) people. So, we need representatives to make compromises for all of us, to solve problems effectively. And we keep a damn close eye on them, so they don't abuse their power.
The same applies to the monopoly on the legitimate use of force.
Guns are too powerful in the hands of the random person.
They can inflict too much damage with it.
So, we need representatives to protect our safety. And we keep a damn close eye on them, so they don't abuse their power.
You don't have to agree, but it would be nice if you understood.
"several others of that list are wrong"
The politicians who you elected are doing exactly what I said.
Ok so not straped to a bed, what is this guy going to do all day?
only registered users can see external links
I had no idea it would be hard to find a decent video depicting a actual crazy person banging around. there are all kinds of people getting mad at games and crap but none of actual nut cases just sitting around banging their heads and such for demonstration purpose.
Was that person crazy BEFORE they locked him up
or did he turn that way from the 'treatment'?
When 'treatment' looks the same as torture, it isn't treatment.
only registered users can see external links
The most stable person in the world would be damaged by your 'treatment'.
Your mental institutions often do great damage to people.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Judges in the US often have your attitude to mental illness.
Many people who pose no danger at all are already locked up like you want.
Based on extrapolation from eight states that provide data on it, there were over one million emergency psychiatric detentions annually between 2013 and 2015.
The fact that 42 states don't even provide data on this is ridiculous.
In my country, around the same period, we had on average 8,300 emergency psychiatric detentions. That's 120 times less for a population that is 19 times smaller than yours.
Am I the only one who thinks that strapping a suicidal person to a bed
is a crime against humanity? Did you have any thoughts about this?
Would you want to get bombed or shot while minding your own business simply because a person wasn't happy with what's in their pants?, i don't
Imagine yourself strapped to a bed for the rest of your life.
The fact that you support this for people who MIGHT do something awful,
is absolute dystopian lunacy. How many people are you talking about?
Do you think your former girlfriend was going to bomb or shoot people?
Nowhere in the modern world are kids as unsafe in school as in the US.
But instead of addressing mental healthcare in a civilized way and keeping guns away from the crazy, your solutions are MORE guns and strap everyone who is not happy in your awful country to a bed. Will that Make America Great Again?
Great like in the 1800's? You have an awful idea of history, if you want that.
Even you are living in absolute luxury compare to what was normal then.
You are also living in blissful freedom compared with people of those times.
Why do people like you want to turn back the clock to savage times?
Would you go back to then, when you get a one way trip in a time machine?
Would my girlfriend have harmed me after she woke up and was able, probably if she had been able to because she was angry i called for help and she lived.
people that have mental issues are not like you and I. We argue and discuss things and don't agree, but we dont' harm each other. Mentally ill people get mad if there is nothing to get mad about, get mad if they don't get what they want and so on. unpredictable.
and there is discussion about gun control for some issues,
there were a couple recent shootings involving people not happy with what's in their pants,
only registered users can see external links
Your country is having a massive problem, not mine.
Are Americans suffering from mental illness more, somehow?
How about you explain that? Are Americans genetically inferior?
Or am I right in saying that your society is fucked up?
If so, why is that not the result from your ideas?
We are dealing with all problems in the opposite way, and we don't have
your problems. A smart person would learn something from that.
How is she living now? Still strapped to a bed? That's not a life.
If that was done to my ex-girlfriend, I would create media outrage until
she was treated humanely. The fact that you accept this is mind-boggling to me.
I have seen mental illness from a short distance. The mother of my brother's
ex-wife was quite crazy. She was in forced mental care several times in her life. I have not heard that she was ever locked up in an isolation cell, the "padded room", which is the most extreme version. The lesser version is a "seclusion room", which is more like a hotel room, but with everything bolted to the floor, below that is the "extra-secure room", which looks like a normal apartment without heavy furnishings to throw with, but with camera surveillance. Those are all temporary measures, in case of a mental health crisis. Fore everyone who is communicative, they have a pretty normal room. They just don't give them any metal knives and forks. The door isn't even locked. They have enough personnel to not have to do that. There is just 24/7 HELP. She was there several times, sometimes a few days, but longest for at least a month. Other than that, she was able to live a 'normal' life. I have visited her for birthday parties several times. She was a bit weird, but I've never seen her freak out. When there is people around, they mostly are able to keep it together.
My brother has seen some episodes though, mostly with a boyfriend.
She had multiple, who lasted between weeks and at maximum a few years.
My brother always got along with them. He saw some huge quarrels, where a guy was pointed to the door by her. That was a usual thing. One came back several times, letting her cool off for a few days, and then it was OK for a while. The stories were interesting. That lasted well into their marriage, until his ex-wife (still wife then) was tired of her mother. She couldn't handle the drama all the time. That lasted one or two years, and then she heard that her mother hang herself from the staircase. I think she just got tired of herself.
Unfortunately, her daughter had some of her 'crazy genes'. My brother is a patient guy, so I didn't see any huge quarrels, but I've seen her flip out several times, over absolutely nothing. In the end she broke the marriage. He had to finish his house, sell it, and pay her off with about $20,000. She found an apartment somewhere and no one has heard from her in years. He has a new girlfriend, a new house renovation project taking years, and the second son on the way.
There is a record of under 10 known transgender suspects out of
4,400 shootings (~0.11%).
The largest group of mass shooters are right-wing extremists.
I know your right-wing media is telling to take guns away from trans people, because they present them as a threat. However, if there is one group of people who is in need of self-defense, it's trans people, which is threatened by right-wing extremists.
It's simple, take away the guns from right-wing extremists, problem solved!
she is going to get arrested again.
didn't learn a damn thing. she should keep her ass out of a war zone. can you imagine the hoopla if she got caught by hamas and was a hostage? we would never hear the end of it.
only registered users can see external links
those hamas freaks are probably thinking, " um some nice young ass is coming,all we gota do is grab her " i mean really, what else would hamas gather from her presence?
humanity who is dependent on it, and people who are mass murdered?
Damn, that's dumb.
The author is Stephen Pollard. From 2008 until December 2021, he was the editor
of The Jewish Chronicle and he remains a senior advisor, and writer on the paper.
You're literally parroting Israeli propaganda.
why is it parroting if it is fact?
Should she 'learn' something from getting arrested for protesting?
Protesting is a right. The law should not be abused to 'teach' people
to not use their democratic rights.
Propaganda isn't 100% untrue, it's about flipping the truth to serve a goal.
The propaganda is trying to make it about her, by calling her narcissist,
instead of addressing the reason why she is protesting; a genocide.
I wouldn't call it propaganda, if it was just a statement of facts.
I'm calling it propaganda, because he's creating a narrative to attack her character.
She is a protester. She has shown herself to be consistent in her principles.
She's not in it for herself. Even you questioned her sanity for spending all her time
and risking life and limb on these issues. She does it, because it attracts interest
to the problem that she is protesting against. That's the goal of literally all protests.
She's not there to get admiration from people, she's there only for the purpose.
People who don't like that, because of their political agenda, try to discredit her,
instead of honestly discussing their differences of opinion. That's a dishonest tactic,
but you seem to like that, or you just don't perceive it.
You better learn to perceive it, because that's how they hack your mind.
it would be much safer to stay away , but she is going willingly, and should she be captured, no effort should be made to retrieve her moreso than folks taken hostage by no fault of their own.
She does put herself in dangerous situations, true.
Are only men allowed to do that, in your opinion?
Getting bombed by Israel is the biggest risk there.
/ˈnдrsəsəst/
noun
noun: narcissist; plural noun: narcissists
a person who has an excessive interest in or admiration of themselves.
"narcissists who think the world revolves around them"
so yea, i would say the word describes her well,
if all things were equal as you and many others claim you want it to be, women and men would be treated the same way if they were in danger. but it's not that way. people tend to be more upset about a woman being a hostage or in danger than a man. why?,i don't know.
It's like on Memorial Day 2017, President Trump visited Arlington National Cemetery, accompanied by then–Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly.
Kelly’s son, Robert, a 29-year-old Marine killed in Afghanistan in 2010, was buried
in Section 60 of the cemetery. While standing by his son’s grave, Trump reportedly turned to Kelly and said: “I don’t get it. What was in it for them?”.
what are they floating in, rafts? what's a little storm?
--------------------------------------- added after 10 hours
cushy freebies from the rich
only registered users can see external links
she has autism
Does Greta Thunberg have ADHD?
Greta Thunberg is a young climate activist who attributes her passion for preventing climate change to her autism.
How rich is Greta Thunberg?
Greta Thunberg has an estimated net worth of $100,000 in 2025. Her net worth in 2025 consists of modest earnings from book royalties, most of which she donates to environmental causes. She also earns income from documentary rights and receives publicly disclosed support for basic living expenses.
so where does this basic living expense come from??? taxes?
-
not all that hot either but i bet hamas would still love to get ahold of her
only registered users can see external links
The Madleen carried essential supplies like baby formula, flour, rice, diapers, water-desalination kits, medical supplies, crutches, and children’s prosthetics.
The Tesla wasn't a permanent gift, but she did use it during her 2019 North American tour.
There’s no evidence she has ADHD. Greta Thunberg has been diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome, which is part of the autism spectrum. I know exactly what it is, because one of my best friends has Asperger’s. He has some problems making decisions and standing up for himself, but people with Asperger’s are in no way narcissists.
That she donates her earnings, is showing the exact opposite of what you are trying to demonstrate.
She could be rich of her book royalties & publications, speaking engagements, awards and prize money, which would have added up to millions by now, but instead she does not keep any of the income personally. All proceeds go into the Greta Thunberg Foundation, which redistributes them to climate and social sustainability efforts. Greta leads a minimalist lifestyle. She avoids luxury and flies only when absolutely necessary. Instead, she favors trains, electric transport, or sailboats. For practical needs like travel and lodging, Greta’s family covers those expenses rather than relying on income from her activism.
It's all evidence that calling her a narcissists is rediculous, she's the opposite.
To you Hamas are some evil idiots, but they do understand when people support their cause of freedom for the Palestinian people. They would not hurt her.
It's sad that you can only think in black and white.
Hum, terrorist?
only registered users can see external links
greta is going to wind up a martyr for her cause, which is not good for her sake.
of any higher thinking than just primitive mocking?
1) She should be prepared to get taken hostage by Hamas.
2) She is a bitch for Hamas!
Claims 1 and 2 are contradictory.
People who think Hamas is cool, don't care about the freedom of Palestinians.
Protesting against the genocide of Palestinians and wanting freedom for Palestinians, is the opposite of 'being a bitch for Hamas'.
She would make Trump admit all his crimes, with the lasso of truth.
Trump has already admitted to most of his crimes (admissions keep spilling from his malfunctioning brain), but not all at once. I imagine that it would take many hours.
Of course you would still deny it, but you would belong to an even smaller minority.
You need to be already brainwashed for this video to work on you.
only registered users can see external links
--------------------------------------- added after 24 hours
dukes of hazard new york style.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
whats the gain in that?
only registered users can see external links
since the police ruined the car, they should have to replace it in my opinion. the thieves would have eventually stopped to get gas or food or whatever, and the car could have been retrieved for the most part intact and usable. this is a case of emergency services just assuming everyone has insurance so fuck it, it don't matter.
i had to share this 1. funny!
i hope it will show up soon.
only registered users can see external links
and there will be no justice for the family,unless there is a chance a company hired this idiot and the family can sue them. but for the illegal, he aint got anything, all he has to do is run for the border once he is out on parole or bail
just look at this guy, has the most evil look in his eyes, as if it was a deliberate act to kill people.
only registered users can see external links
He didn't even do it on purpose. It's reckless and he caused the death of 3 people.
That's bad, but according to you, all illegals are drugdealers, murderers and r@pists.
The only thing you come up with, in months, is some truck driver who fucked up.
By the way, he's NOT officially an illegal immigrant. That's a false statement.
He claimed asylum, which can take years to resolve. His case is still pending in immigration court. He paid a $5,000 immigration bond. While waiting, he was granted
a federal work permit, which allowed him to lawfully remain and work in the U.S..
That enabled him to lawfully acquire a commercial driver’s license in California.
From Jan 1 till July 31, 2025, there have been 268 mass shootings in the U.S.
Total casualties include 262 people killed (including perpetrators) and 1,161 wounded.
NONE of the perpetrators have been identified as illegal immigrants.
The US is mostly deporting hard working people. Where are all those drugdealers, murderers and r@pists that Trump keeps talking about?
of course he cried for asylum, that's how the terrorist get in here and hang out in plain site.
i call this a terrorist attack although it only killed 3,it has harmed alot of lives, you know family.
A terrorist attack is an act of mass violence for political reasons.
You're now twisting definitions to fit your political agenda.
Where are all the real drugdealers, murderers, r@pists and terrorists?
You're only deporting fruit-pickers, roof-workers and hairdressers.
You’re braggadocious
Self centered
Obnoxious
Highly opinionated and a bit of a know it all to name a few
People don’t like that I bet you got beat up a lot in school
1.6 million people so far here in the US have signed a penton asking for the indians release, "it was just a accident". are you fucking kidding me? he watched 3 people die and didn't even as much as wince.
a cold heartless motherfucker is all he is.
only registered users can see external links
Did he know then that he caused the death of 3 people?
You watch him knowing the result, thinking he knew it too.
Understand that this idea puts your brain in a certain state.
I agree that he was being incredibly stupid, but I see no INTENT of killing anyone
and I don't think that you can determine his emotions from a few seconds of video,
that is cut short and likely shows an angle of the accident that he couldn't see.
That camera is much more to the front and higher, than his line of sight.
Why do they pause, or end, or loop the video, at his expressionless face?
I have searched for more video, but I cannot find it. Did you?
Do we have any video or reports about what he did when he found out?
Maybe he starts crying like a baby, directly after they cut it.
Can we believe any media reporting, if they all cut the video short?
Show me real evidence of him being that horrible person, and I'm with you.
Just a tiny thing about that turban, do you who wear turbans like that?
that you hear "immigrant involved in crash". If I don't agree with phart calling it a "terrorist attack", you find me to be a horrible person. I have standards for terms:
"Intentional, directed violence, against civilians to instill fear and achieve political, religious, or ideological goals."
Meanwhile, you lot have been making fun about driving over protesters, when you don't agree with those protesters. You agree with intentionally killing protesters,
that you don't agree with, politically. That does fit the definition of terrorism.
You lot have made a hero from a 17 y.o. kid who went to a protest carrying an AR-15, 'definitely not looking for trouble', but finding it, and killing 2 people, wounding a 3th.
If you do agree with protesters, you will cry for years, when one of them is killed.
I find you two horrible people, for your bigotry.
I'm here discussing opinions, you just drop them on people
and then chicken out for talking about them. (not you phart)
You're just belittling everyone who doesn't agree with you.
How about that, for being 'Self centered' and 'Obnoxious'?
Take a look in the mirror!
What the hell does Amsterdam have to do with it?
That's the weirdest change of subject (Red Herring fallacy) ever.
See, you're chickening out from the actual subject again.
My country, and even Amsterdam, has less problems with drugs, than the US.
only registered users can see external links
The US has such a horrible opioids problem that it's central to you border security policies and pointed out by Trump as the reason for the tariffs with Mexico and Canada.
In 2023, the US had 105,000 people dying from overdoses.
80,000 of those deaths involved opioids.
(population: 334.9 million) -> 31.4 o.d. deaths/100,000 people
23.9 opioid o.d. deaths/100,000 people
In 2023, the Netherlands had 338 people dying from overdoses.
178 of those deaths involved opioids.
(population 17.88 million) -> 1.9 o.d. deaths/100,000
1.00 opioid o.d. deaths/100,000 people
With all due respect, you are very opinionated with regard to the United States of America, from our government, our governmental policies, all the way down to how you perceive how Americans raise their children. Just sayin’…..
I stand for my opinions, I always provide a justification or at least a reason for why I have them. I am here to discuss them. I don't just drop a zinger of an opinion and then just bugger off.
Show that I'm wrong, and I'll accept that I'm wrong. Those guys just cower off,
when they cannot defend their position any longer. You can see it for yourself
in all the abandoned discussions.
When other people have an opinion that I disagree with, I don't just belittle them,
I always try to explain why I don't agree with them or why they are wrong.
I only call them dumb, when they keep repeating the same tired old nonsense over and over.
By the way the standing tall was about seniority 10 years a piece but I guess that went right over your head
In relation to seniority and 'standing tall', are you talking about your dick?
Congratulations!
So put that in your opinionated pipe and smoke it
a conscious decision to run over protesters, not an accident.
If a white right-winger killed 10 black gay-rights protesters, while it is clear that
the driver was not in any danger, you would defend the driver, because you think those protesters are wrong on principle.
You can disagree with protesters blocking a road, but that's not a capital offense.
It's an inconvenience, not a violent attack, no reason for the driver to use lethal force to defend themselves.
What you include in that argument, could be an argument, if it was true, but that's no argument to allow driving over people, when it is NOT true.
It doesn't require new laws to allow people to defend themselves, when they are in danger. Your self defense laws are already taking the position of the one defending themselves, accepting their claim of being at risk much too easily.
I would never blame the people in the black car. They are innocent victims.
I don't know who those 3 million people are, and I don't agree with them.
The guy still made a very irresponsible and illegal move, causing 3 deaths.
I just don't see that as a reason to call him a terrorist, or an evil person.
Can you understand that morality is a scale, not binary?
a commercial drivers license is difficult to get for people that can read and speak english as a first language,not to mention the health card and such, and this fool makes a illegal u turn and kills 3 people and all folks can whine about is he is not illegal he is a asylum seeker. no he is a son of a bitch and he killed 3 people. death penalty and that way no one has to keep him up.
only registered users can see external links
He will be punished according the law.
--------------------------------------- added after 133 hours
only registered users can see external links
here is the kind of shit i was referring to when i ask if the democrats would let him be punished, they want him to be made to do community service?!!!!!!! sheesh, that is not justice.
He will likely be judged guilty of either:
1. Vehicular Manslaughter (U.S., U.K., other common law countries)
Definition: Causing the death of another person due to negligent or reckless driving.
Examples: Running a red light and hitting another car.
Driving under the influence and causing a fatal crash.
2. Dangerous Driving Causing Death (Used in many countries, including Canada, Australia, and parts of the EU) - Focuses specifically on reckless or dangerous conduct behind the wheel. The "dangerous" part refers to behavior that a competent and careful driver would clearly recognize as risky.
3. Involuntary Manslaughter (broader term in some systems) - Used when a person kills someone unintentionally, but due to unlawful or reckless actions.
He can expect to be in jail for at least a few years.
He's very likely not getting his asylum anymore either.
If he was a MAGA-hat wearing white guy, causing the death of 3 immigrants,
Trump would pardon him the day after his sentence.
only registered users can see external links
another 1 that is not professional but explains it, no remorse,even said um, a smurk,
only registered users can see external links
She talks about a serious systematic problem with companies respecting safety standards, and you completely ignore it all. You're only talking about the things that fit your agenda. She talks 10 seconds about his facial expression, and that's the only thing you got out of it.
She's also making a judgement mistake by blaming that the truck was overweight on the driver. It's the company's responsibility to respect safety regulations. If they don't do that, they are most likely forcing all their drivers to drive overweight containers. Do you think he was in the position to demand anything from his employer?
She does point out correctly that there are lots of drivers on your roads who are unqualified to do so. This guy was obviously unqualified. Have you ever seen how they drive trucks in India? They have some of the most lethal roads on the planet. Maybe that's why he was afraid to go back to India. Most truckers don't survive to make it to retirement.
Instead of your government fixing the system, so you don't have Indian Mad Max drivers, the Trump administration, with the help of Elon Musk, has destroyed most agencies that need to investigate companies that violate the rules. And now your media is distracting you from that, by blaming the driver. Now you dumb-asses want to lynch him, without giving a shit about the systemic problems, that were already going on,
and which Trump/Musk have made even worse.
So go ahead, burn him at the stake! Do you think that will solve ANYTHING?
and the tickets are not cheap. the dmv will give you a 2000 pound leway, but if you are 2001 pounds over, you get ticketed for the whole amount.
here is a google result
Yes, the truck driver can be held responsible if their vehicle is overweight, especially if it leads to an accident. While the trucking company and other parties may also share liability, the driver has a duty to operate the vehicle safely and within legal weight limits. Failing to do so, such as by ignoring weight restrictions or not verifying the load's weight, can be considered negligence and make the driver liable for resulting damages.
It's likely that they forced him to break rules, because this company has a record
of multiple violations. If he can provide evidence that they forced him, that's called
"defense of duress". With their record, that's a credible defense.
“Coercion” under FMCSA rules:
Since 2016, the FMCSA “driver coercion rule” (49 CFR § 390.6) explicitly prohibits motor carriers, shippers, receivers, or brokers from coercing drivers into violating safety regulations (like hours of service, vehicle condition, or weight rules).
If the cargo's documentation is NOT showing that it's over weight,
then that's probably "fraud". He will certainly not be responsible then.
In any case, that's not applicable now, to his illegal U-turn,
but if he can show that they are consistently scamming him with his hours,
and overworking him, that is a legitimate defense.
He doesn't look tired in the dashcam footage, but he also doesn't look lively.
You said yourself that he looks mentally numb. That's a sign too.
ok, so he looses a job or he drives and hopes like hell shit don't hit the fan.
How about not making drivers responsible for making sure that companies
follow the law and respect safety?
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is the primary federal agency tasked with regulating the trucking industry. Its mission is to reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities involving large trucks and buses through regulations, enforcement, education, and research.
Under the Trump administration (and reportedly DOGE’s influence), enforcement actions and staffing took hits:
Enforcement dropped sharply. Enforcement actions by FMCSA declined nearly 60% in early 2025 compared to the same period under the previous administration.
This slowdown began soon after Trump took office, as new procedural requirements (like requiring legal review of cases) delayed enforcement. Cases of dangerous companies were left unaddressed, with some dropped entirely, even those involved in fatal crashes.
Staff reductions occurred in NHTSA, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a sister agency under the U.S. Department of Transportation that sets safety standards for vehicles. NHTSA saw its workforce trimmed by more than 25%, dropping from 772 to 555 employees, which critics warn undermines safety oversight.
DOGE’s role (Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency): DOGE reportedly terminated staff at NHTSA, part of broader layoffs and reorganizations, and thereby could have weakened safety oversight.
I'm not saying this accident was a (direct) result of Trump's or DOGE's actions,
but they WILL cause accidents.
Are white American drivers never making illegal moves in traffic?
Can white Americans drive trucks from birth? No need to train and test them?
Can white Americans drive as long as the employers wants them to, without
ever getting tired?
Or will you just feel a lot better about it, when a white American does the exact same thing, causing the exact same number or more deaths?
didn't know but 1 of 4 signs he was shown, using a interpreter and had 2 not 1,but 2 cdl license issued to him from democrat states. see a pattern? democrat run dmvs issue people that can't speak or read english a license to operate a 40 ton metal object among us. so dangerous.
It's ALWAYS Republicans who cut funds for oversight and safety, not Democrats.
You yourself are a big fan of that "deregulation".
How about regulation that keeps unqualified drivers from getting drivers licenses?
⚖️ Framing & Politics
Republicans: Typically frame these moves as “cutting red tape” and helping small trucking businesses survive.
Democrats: More likely to prioritize strict enforcement and stronger safety requirements, often aligning with labor unions and safety advocacy groups.
Safety Advocates’ View: Many Republican-led changes (especially delays/rollbacks of Obama-era rules) were seen as increasing risks of fatigue, speeding, or poorly trained drivers on the road.
Obama/Democrats/Biden introduced training improvements: MAP-21
(Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, 2012).
It was a surface transportation reauthorization law that:
- Funded highways and transit for FY2013–2014,
- Reauthorized highway safety programs,
- Included permanent provisions like the Entry-Level Driver Training (ELDT) mandate and the Drug & Alcohol Clearinghouse requirement.
Republican-Led Deregulation Affecting Road Safety NEGATIVELY:
1. Hours of Service (HOS) Rules
HOS rules limit how long truck drivers can drive before resting.
Under the Obama administration, FMCSA tightened these rules (e.g., requiring two overnight periods in the 34-hour restart).
Under Trump (2017), Republicans suspended and rolled back some of those rest requirements, giving drivers more “flexibility.”
Criticism: Safety advocates argued this could increase fatigue-related crashes.
Industry supported it as easing unnecessary burdens.
2. Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs)
ELDs automatically record driving hours, making it harder to falsify logs.
Mandated under Obama (final rule in 2015).
Some Republicans tried to delay or repeal the mandate (Rep. Brian Babin of Texas introduced bills).
Trump administration implemented the rule but signaled openness to exemptions.
Criticism: Rolling back ELDs would reduce compliance with fatigue laws.
3. Speed Limiters
Obama-era FMCSA proposed requiring electronic speed limiters on trucks.
The Trump DOT (Republican-led) withdrew the rule in 2017.
Criticism: Safety groups say this killed a measure that could have reduced crash severity.
4. Entry-Level Driver Training (ELDT) Rule Delays Mandated by MAP-21 (2012).
Finalized under Obama in 2016.
The Trump administration delayed compliance twice (from 2020 to 2022), citing industry readiness.
Criticism: Delaying left gaps in training standards, potentially putting less-prepared drivers on the road.
5. Enforcement Slowdown
As I mentioned earlier, FMCSA enforcement actions dropped ~60% after Trump took office, partly due to new procedural hurdles and a general deregulatory stance.
Criticism: Allowed unsafe carriers to operate longer without penalties.
SEE A PATTERN?
only registered users can see external links
They also blamed the driver, and he was certainly not innocent.
No matter if he caused the deaths of 100 people, by driving into a truck transporting nitroglycerin (just an example), an accident is still an accident. A judge should weigh the responsibility for the accident and the likelihood of what can be expected resulting from the risk, less what actually happened. That's why a drunk driver is also getting pretty severely punished, if they didn't cause any accident. They can be expected
to cause deaths. Judges shouldn't act on "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth".
"Over the past decade (2012–2021), Canada experienced a decline in commercial vehicle collisions and fatalities. In 2012, there were 400 fatalities resulting from commercial vehicle collisions, which decreased to 343 by 2021, a reduction of
over 14%."
"Regarding the involvement of immigrants in fatal truck accidents, specific data is not readily available. However, a study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal indicates that recent immigrants are less likely to be involved in serious motor vehicle crashes compared to the general population. The study found a 45% relative reduction in the incidence of crashes among recent immigrants, suggesting they are less prone to being drivers in serious motor vehicle crashes."
only registered users can see external links
Now why is that?
When a 'native' gets into an accident, there are not immediately millions of people pointing at the driver. They will wait until the legal process results in a conclusion.
An immigrant driver is immediately blamed, and when they are found guilty, they don't just get punished like the 'native', they also often get deported. That's why they are
in general more careful. They have more to lose.
Still, an immigrant from a country like India with driving experience of the lethal roads of India, might not be the best suited for a driving job in a western country.
They should get extensive training and go through strict tests, before they are
accepted as qualified.
That's not what your regime is doing. You want to disqualify all immigrant by default and deport them without a chance, purely out of prejudices, while closing your eyes
to companies that cause accidents on the roads.
"Reports indicate that he had been driving for approximately 13 hours on the day of the crash, which is within the legal driving limits for commercial truck drivers in Canada. However, there have been discussions about the broader issues of driver fatigue and working conditions in the trucking industry."
I once drove back from Denmark, with friends, after our vacation together. It took 11 hours, because of traffic jams. We switched driving position several times, so I had probably driven about half of the hours. When we came home, I was beat.
Driving 13 hour on end is brutal. Why do we allow that to happen on our roads?
In my country, there are not enough resting places either. The difference is that
you can drive from the most Northern end to the most Southern end in 4 hours,
if there are no traffic jams. It's mostly international truckers who have a hard time finding a resting place in my country. So, how should it be solved?
Either the government invests in resting places, or the companies that operate international truckers should be forced to invest in resting places on their properties. Just waiting until the problem fixes itself, is never a solution.
only registered users can see external links
The report itself says that he is capable of using translation devices.
Does the fact that he uses translation devices in court, tell you something?
The communication in court is a lot more complex than the communication
with a traffic cop. He came over very polite, by the way.
In the EU, drivers are constantly driving in countries that they don't speak
the language of. That doesn't necessarily make them worse drivers.
only registered users can see external links
I'm indeed calling that racism. Are those emotions genuine? Probably, but not admirable.
When was it ever an Indian guy shooting up kids?
terrorist
as for the indians, i have always thought they were a rather peaceful people except when it came to buying all the 7-11's and making a dollar.
if they (there were a few female school shooters) act out of a political or religious or dogmatic ideology. If they are just crazy, even if they are without conscience and wanting to do harm, that's not 'terrorism', by definition.
Indians are mostly a peaceful people, especially the ones wearing turbans,
who are Sikh. The Sikh religion is the most peaceful religion on Earth.
They do have emotions, but they are taught to act from reason and divine remembrance rather than raw impulse. It's about balance: don’t let emotions dominate you, but also don’t bury them. Instead, integrate them with reason, remembrance of the Divine, and ethical living.
Sikhism teaches that one should act from a place of Naam Simran (remembrance of God) and Gurmat (the Guru’s wisdom) rather than from impulsive emotional reactions.
The aim is not suppression of feelings, but recognition and transformation—channeling emotions toward constructive, spiritual, and ethical action.
Example: Anger itself isn’t always condemned—righteous indignation against injustice is encouraged—but uncontrolled personal anger is discouraged.
The more 'extreme' a Sikh becomes, the less likely they are to even hurt a fly.
That's why I berated your use of the term 'terrorism' in his case. He fucked up,
he made his move intentionally, but I very sure that he didn't intend to hurt anyone. However, your first impulse is always to assume evil intent, when any person is doing something that results in a negative outcome, or just something that you don't like. You do that, because it's part of the ideology that you support. They are learned mental processes, which they teach you intentionally. It's so you can tell yourself
that you are 'morally correct' and everyone else is 'immoral'. It's a very effective strategy to discourage ethical and critical thinking.
but no, he was to interested in putting tampons in boys bathrooms instead of security guards at the doors?
um?
only registered users can see external links
in case you didn't see it in the news,
"On Wednesday, Robin Westman, a male-born 23-year-old transgender, killed 2 children and injured at least 17 people while they were celebrating Mass at the Catholic school, according to police. Westman then committed suicide."
only registered users can see external links
so instead of sheepishly laughing, tell the world
what's so ridiculous about his ideas.
To me, he made a lot of sense.
I don't think paying your politicians a medium wage would work, because then they would only take more 'donations', and sell their influence to even more special interests and wealthy people. At their current wage, people are already saying that they should
be allowed to 'better themselves', because they are all educated people.
I would propose making their wage dependent on them actually engaging in politics. Some of them never show up for debates, never write a bill, never write an amendment. They are just present to vote the party line, without ever reading a bill.
Our biggest party in the House of Commons is the PVV, the right-wing populist party
of Geert Wilders. They have 37 representatives, and their corner is almost empty the majority of the time. It's completely empty 34% of all debates. One representative has never showed himself in debates, only shows up to vote. Five of them have never even given their 'maidenspeech'. Still, they get all paid $164,265/year.
My party is present for less debates, but they only have 5 representatives, they are almost as effective with less than 1/5th of the people. They also get paid $164,265/year, but they donate 53% of it to their party, leaving them just about median wage.
They don't take any personal donations, they don't trade in stocks, and they know
damn-well what they're voting for, when they show up to vote.
Here’s another one of the videos where your average “someone” finds interesting content and decides to upload it under their name and the only thing they change is that they’ve added their face which then makes it “theirs”. The woman in this video looks completely crazy, mouth as big as one you would see on a horse.
only registered users can see external links
It was nicely written (although I suspect some help from ChatGPT was deployed,
I recognize the style) and perfectly delivered. It was funny too, at times,
but that reaction is either an act, or the result of a big canister of Nitrous oxide.
Here's a good police vest cam video:
only registered users can see external links
(then lies about it)"
only registered users can see external links
Maybe that's why she's laughing (to the bank).
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
The SP has continued its long-standing stance: opposing mass labor migration and advocating for stricter controls to protect workers and housing markets. This aligns with their broader views on neoliberalism, globalization, and safeguarding the Dutch working class.
only registered users can see external links
This is not a new stands of the SP. The party has been saying the exact same thing, since 1983, far before right-wing populists were addressing it as a problem. However, right-wingers used it to demonize brown people, to redirect people's anger about seeing their jobs being given to cheap workers, for the profits of the employers, towards racism.
Since that right-wing populist party was voted in as the biggest party in 2023, all their laws were designed to restrict actual refugees, and NONE to restrict the million labor migrants from Eastern Europe. They only care about the racism, not about fixing the problem.
This is the stands of my SP, about labor migration, from their own website:
only registered users can see external links
The SP considers labor migration a form of modern slavery. There are between 800,000 and 1.2 million labor migrants in the Netherlands, no one knows the exact number.
They are brought here by companies, exploited, and discarded when no longer needed. An increasingly large portion of the homeless population in the Netherlands consists of labor migrants. Meanwhile, the pressure on our neighborhoods, social services, and housing market is high, even as companies profit.
But labor migration also causes problems in the countries of origin. It uproots communities, leaves children growing up without their parents, and leads to local jobs being taken over by even lower-paid labor migrants. Through various legal loopholes, more and more labor migrants from outside Europe are now working in the Netherlands. This lawlessness must come to an end.
We will stop uncontrolled labor migration. We will do this by introducing work permits and setting a migration cap of 40,000 per year. This way, we ensure that only those who are truly needed can come here to work, we can tackle the exploitation of labor migrants by employers, and we can help those who genuinely need protection and are fleeing war and violence.
only registered users can see external links
damn, how could she do this?
only registered users can see external links
1. Daniel Ball (Florida)
• Arrested the day after his pardon on separate felony firearm charges, linked to possession of a gun and ammunition as a convicted felon. His Jan 6 charges were dismissed due to the pardon, but the gun case remains active.
2. Matthew Huttle (Indiana)
• Shot and killed by law enforcement during a traffic stop mere days after receiving a pardon. He had an extensive criminal history, including DUI and child abuse, and was still facing driving-related charges at the time.
3. Andrew Taake (Texas)
• Became a fugitive post pardon, wanted on unrelated charges involving solicitation of a minor.
4. Edward Kelley
• Although pardoned for his Jan 6-related convictions, prosecutions for conspiracy to murder law enforcement officers were not covered by the pardon. He was later sentenced to life in prison in July 2025.
5. Enrique Tarrio
• After his pardon, Tarrio made headlines for inflammatory rhetoric, calling for "retribution" and targeting an FBI agent, in interviews with far-right media.
6. David Daniel (North Carolina)
• Despite the pardon, he still faces ongoing charges unrelated to Jan 6: production and possession of child pornography involving minors.
7. Daniel Wilson (Kentucky)
• A judge ruled that his pardon might not cover unrelated charges, specifically illegal weapons possession. The court ordered him to return to prison to resume a five-year sentence.
former obama supporter, air force veteran, unarmed, a black cop selects her over many other people with weapons visible in their hands, to kill, a black cop killing a white woman, and that bothers no one on the liberal side. well apparently someone thought it was wrong because her family did get a small settlement of 5 million dollars.
that black cop insured she wouldn't be pardoned, tried, given a second chance or anything, he decided to be judge, jury and executioner for a unarmed woman of another race.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
what a line of bullshit, other officers resisted shooting armed people, he chose a woman , a white woman,they claimed he saved lives by killing her. what was she going to do, strangle people with her bare hands>>?
that protected those cops. She posed a real threat.
Remember not giving a crap about the death of the boy on the right?
Remember your argument? He didn't follow police orders.
Why is that only applicable to black kids and not to MAGA lunatics?
1. Ray Holmberg – North Dakota
Position: Former State Senator
Conviction: In March 2025, Holmberg was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison for traveling to Prague between 2011 and 2016 with the intent to engage in sexual activities with minors. He also pleaded guilty to receiving child sexual abuse material.
Status: Serving his sentence; required to register as a sex offender upon release.
2. RJ May – South Carolina
Position: Former State Representative
Charges: In June 2025, May was arrested and charged with 10 counts of distributing child sexual abuse material. He allegedly used the screen name “joebidennnn69” to exchange over 200 files on the Kik messaging platform.
Status: Resigned from office in August 2025; awaiting trial.
3. Aaron von Ehlinger – Idaho
Position: Former State Representative
Conviction: In August 2022, von Ehlinger was convicted of raping a legislative intern and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
Status: Serving his sentence; required to register as a sex offender upon release.
4. Rick Roeber – Missouri
Position: Former State Representative
Allegations: In 2021, Roeber was expelled from the Missouri House following an investigation into allegations of sexual and physical abuse of his children. He denied the allegations.
Status: No criminal charges filed; expelled from office.
5. Justin Eichorn – Minnesota
Position: Former State Senator
Charges: In March 2025, Eichorn was arrested during a sting operation on suspicion of soliciting a minor for sex. He was charged in federal court and resigned from the Senate.
Status: Awaiting trial; resigned from office.
6. Tony Navarrete – Arizona
Position: Former State Senator
Charges: In August 2021, Navarrete was charged with multiple counts of sexual conduct with underaged children. He resigned from the state senate following the charges.
Status: Awaiting trial; resigned from office.
7. Matt Gaetz – Florida
Position: U.S. Congressman
Allegations: In 2021, Gaetz faced allegations of paying and sleeping with a minor. The Justice Department investigated the claims but ended the probe in 2023 without charges due to witness credibility issues.
Status: No charges filed; remains in office.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Al Franken allegedly toughed an ADULT woman's ass.
That's no where near the same. You are doing false equivalency.
Do you even understand that?
If you want to include adults, the perp should have at least grabbed em by the pussy.
Women who work around Republican politicians should expect some sexual misconduct. It's in their 'job description'. Not literally anymore, but definitely culturally and practically.
In December 2022, President Biden signed the Speak Out Act, which renders pre-dispute NDAs (those signed before any misconduct arises) unenforceable for claims of sexual assault or harassment.
The law passed with strong bipartisan backing. However, all 215 Democrats voted yes, while only 100 Republicans voted yes and 109 Republicans voted no (house of reps).
Your filthy propaganda and make belief isn't an argument.
You only have your prejudices; she's a black women, so.....
Even if it were true, since when is that the same as a sex offense?
A sex offense violates someone's bodily autonomy, selling sex is consensual.
You keep using false equivalency.
In any case, by law that is not prostitution, but "Quid pro quo sexual harassment".
It's prohibited under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which applies to most employers with 15 or more employees.
How far have you deviated? We started out at child sex abuse or sexual misconduct with minors, a heinous crime, and you are now pretending that "Quid pro quo sexual harassment" is the same.
Are you pretending that Republicans would be less guilty of this?
and democrats will willing have sex, just so they can use it to their advantage later, remember monica lewinsky? she even kept the friggen dress!!!!
All to distract from you lot picking a horrible pervert for president and your
continued support for all your other pervert politicians. Weak!
Stop VOTING IN complete degenerates, and maybe I will start giving a damn
about some Democrats having slight discretions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is what your Kamala story is based on. I asked Grok, so you can't say
that it's all left-wing biased.
I asked: "Is there any, even remotely credible, evidence that Kamala Harris has gained advantage in her career, from sexual relations with superiors?"
This is the answer:
Claims that Kamala Harris gained career advantages through sexual relationships with superiors primarily stem from her relationship with Willie Brown, a prominent California politician, in the mid-1990s. Brown, then Speaker of the California Assembly and later San Francisco mayor, was separated from his wife but still legally married during their relationship. Harris was a deputy district attorney in Alameda County at the time. Brown appointed Harris to two state commissions—the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and the Medical Assistance Commission—which paid her over $400,000 (equivalent to roughly $800,000 in 2025 dollars) for part-time work over five years. These appointments have fueled speculation that her relationship with Brown significantly boosted her early career.
However, there is no definitive evidence proving that Harris’s career trajectory was solely or primarily due to this relationship. Critics argue the appointments were patronage, a common practice in politics, and not necessarily tied to their personal relationship. Harris’s qualifications—her education at Howard University and UC Hastings, and her experience as a prosecutor—suggest she was a credible candidate for such roles. Her subsequent rise, including becoming San Francisco District Attorney, California Attorney General, U.S. Senator, and Vice President, relied on her electoral success and professional record, which included prosecuting high-profile cases and implementing reforms.
On the other side, skeptics point to the timing of Brown’s appointments and his influence in San Francisco politics as evidence of favoritism. Social media posts and some opinion pieces, like those from 2019 and 2020, amplify this narrative, claiming Harris “slept her way to the top.” These claims often lack primary evidence beyond the fact of the relationship and appointments, and they tend to ignore the broader context of her career achievements. Fact-checking sources, such as FactCheck.org, have debunked exaggerated claims, like assertions that Harris broke up Brown’s marriage, noting he was separated for over a decade before dating Harris.
The evidence is circumstantial and heavily debated. While the relationship with Brown and the appointments are documented, attributing her career success primarily to them oversimplifies a decades-long record of professional accomplishments. Misogynistic framing of the narrative, as noted in analyses from outlets like MSNBC and Refinery29, often amplifies these claims to undermine her credibility, a tactic less commonly applied to male politicians. Without concrete evidence of quid pro quo beyond the appointments, the claim remains speculative and lacks definitive substantiation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing more than I already knew. Just your party's filthy tactics to destroy
a black woman's credibility, by using people's racism and sexism.
Of course, it's not only racism and sexism, you'll use whatever dirty tactics that are available, like with Tim Walz. It is to be expected. I just want Democrats to stop rolling over and fight back.
When Biden let your election hinge on a black woman, who no one voted for in a primary election, to defend the world from fascism, I was very much annoyed. "Thanks, you old fool, you just bet the world on the US not being as racist and sexist as we very much fear that it is."
only registered users can see external links
What fricken truck driver tries to execute a U-turn on highway, freeway/expressway and in this case, Florida turnpike?
only registered users can see external links
i mentioned this elsewhere and of course ananas thinks i am a idiot for being upset.
may or may not be the same man but same name and miserable driving record.
only registered users can see external links
hahahaha, 54% approval.
gee, let people that can't read our signs, can't speak our language, drive up and down the road like legal citizens. wow how stupid can you get? oh, i need to stop saying that people will take it as a challenge.
to lawfully remain and work in the US, are NOT illegals.
"Illegal" means against the law. They are not.
who wants to live in a clean law abiding red state.
only registered users can see external links
What Would Jesus Say About Donald Trump?
only registered users can see external links
Have fun!
maybe this will help you understand anannas
Wrong in 10 seconds. Like women cannot do any of those things.
It's how society has organized itself, but it doesn't have to be.
It's mostly because of guys like you, not because of women.
Calling women TikTok-influencers is also damn disrespectful.
Almost half of my colleagues are women, they do just as good a job as the men.
You can also mostly scrap the military and the police.
Wars are started by men and criminals are also mostly men.
This video was damn awful. Except the styling, that was pretty nice.
You can see who has the money to make videos like this.
Directly funded by right-wing conservative donors.
and why aren't they already doing them in higher %'s than stated in the video if they are so qualified?
what keeps a woman out of a fire truck?
etc.
you can claim this and that but when it comes down to the facts, it is because they ,the women ,do not make a effort to over come any perceived or otherwise odds to do the jobs. Quite similar to why blacks are not doing some jobs. Perceived odds or problems. Not real 1's
Do white man not make an effort to do those jobs?
in construction as much. Women are educated higher in the US.
You can look down on the jobs women do, but most are better jobs.
Those jobs are just paid less, because historically more women do them.
It's not that those jobs are less important. Woman are incredibly over-represented
in healthcare, education, childcare and legal services.
When men take 5 days off, everything will be fine. When women take 5 days off, everyone in the hospitals and elder homes would be DEAD.
My country employs lots of immigrants too, but at least I support equal rights and equal pay for them, while also considering if I want my economy to be based on low-wage jobs as much as that. I think that a country progresses as a whole, from maximizing automation, creating better jobs and maximizing people's potential to fill the better jobs. That's best in both the capitalist system and any socialist system that I would support. It both considers the labor shortage and the aging population.
The policy of kicking out immigrants does align with the policy of destroying public education. You need enough poorly literate people, to replace those immigrants.
It's a bit of a waste to make people with academic degrees pick fruit and cut meat.
However, is that MAGA or Make Americans Dumb Again?
Is your country on a strategy that supports thriving in the long term?
In my opinion, Trump's trade-wars are the Hail Mary of a crumbling empire.
The US cannot compete honestly, so it's trying to cheat it's way back on top.
That doesn't work, because it angers all it's partners, it's bleeding support.
People like phart have already accepted that, so they are now considering
to stop trying to compete globally completely, pull up the walls, and just run
the US fully independently. Apparently, the top capitalist country cannot handle competition from a 'communist' country.
"What's the average wage of a meat-packer in the US?"
Answer: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) – May 2023:
For the occupation code Slaughterers and Meat Packers (51-3023):
Hourly wage: between $14.64 and $16.62.
"Are there a lot of immigrants, legal or not, working as meat-packer, in the US?"
Answer: Yes — immigrants make up a significant portion of the U.S. meatpacking workforce, both legally and, in many cases, without authorization. Here's what the latest data reveals:
Key Statistics:
Overall Immigrant Representation:
More than half (51.5%) of frontline meatpacking workers are immigrants, compared to roughly 17% across the total U.S. workforce.
A USDA-funded study confirms this overrepresentation:
51.5% of frontline workers are foreign-born.
There could be some workers in a high quality meat industry, explaining the wages that you saw. There is probably also the cheap quality, that might not
even be safe to eat, where the workers make even less.
I don't live in your country, I get all my information about the US from news outlets and YouTube channels, that are not funded by special interests, but by views. They have been reliable on almost every fact that I check. The things that I check are statistics, research papers and poll results. They provide me a helicopter view of your country. Your country is BIG though. What is true for Florida, can be false for Texas, New York or Minnesota. Those differences are important, so I look at those too, but the overall picture is also important, because that's for a big part under control of your Federal Government. If you want to know the effects of Biden or Trump, you look at the big picture, without losing track of action vs result.
(Correlation does not imply causation)
("post hoc ergo propter hoc": because one event follows another,
it doesn't automatically mean the first event caused the second)
Quite often, super markets will beef up their staff during the high volume period beginning prior to Thanksgiving and ending after Super Bowl. Super Bowl LX is scheduled for Sunday, February 8 meaning I would be happy to be temporary seasonal help OR work to May when I return to Michigan.
If I had aspirations of becoming a supermarket manager, I might consider it
for a second.... Hell no, money isn't everything.
I'm making about the same as an Albert Heijn manager, without having to do
that job. I'm very sure that I like my job better. I have no idea what my job
would pay in Florida, but it looks like it would be a lot more. I found one job
that I'm probably overqualified for, at Ology Bioservices (Alachua, FL):
Specialist I — QA Product Release (Boca Raton):
Handling batch record reviews, document tracking, product release, all very much in line with production support and compliance. Compensation ranges from $76K–$118K/year. Sounds like only 10% of my job description now,
so boring as fuck, but I could make $100k per year.
And, as was discussed earlier, if I need to pay $1000/month for home insurance, I'm already down $12,000/year.
I pay $51.28/month for home, contents and liability insurance.
How about health insurance? Do you get it for free at Publix.
I pay $197/month on the open insurance market, for a package that includes physiotherapy and some coverage for my chiropractor. I have no dental insurance, because that sucks. It's cheaper to pay for it myself.
Healthcare as an employer benefit doesn't really exist in my country. At best we have a bit of reduction in a group-deal, but those are often the most expensive insurers. It's only a good deal for people with disabilities or chronic illnesses.
Our government has a policy of discouragement against employer provided healthcare coverage, because it could restrict job mobility and could be misused by the employer as a bargaining chip in pay and other benefits negotiations.
We don't have a certain number of sick days. When we're sick, we have paid sick leave, with a maximum of 2 years, by law. After that we have disability benefits or unemployment benefit, depending on medical exams.
i am not the first person that has felt like a person could do better for themselves, listen to this speech,
1967,
only registered users can see external links
listen at about 9:00,where he tells them to stay in school.
where he tells the students to be the best dr and etc.
what part of that message did so many people miss out on along time ago?
--------------------------------------- added after 75 seconds
I’m already a millionaire, when I retire in about two years I will have anything I want
and check its sources, to see if it's reliable and accurate.
12 and 14 a hour to bag grocerys is damn good money for unskilled work
Whether Publix employees make "good money" depends on the role, experience, location, and individual expectations. Here's a breakdown based on available data:
Hourly Wages: Publix employees earn an average hourly wage of around $14.99 to $28.64, depending on the source and role. Entry-level positions like baggers and cashiers typically earn $11–$15 per hour, while specialized roles like pharmacy technicians ($17–$20) or meat cutters ($18–$23) earn more. Management roles, such as store managers, can earn $60,000–$80,000 annually, with some sources citing higher averages for specialized positions like pharmacy managers ($135,949/year).
He is openly fiddling with it, to make it spout his own conspiracies on X.
I added "check its sources, to see if it's reliable and accurate", right?
If you think your AI is more reliable, show me some significant differences
in results and then prove why yours is more accurate, instead of these unsubstantiated accusations.
Remember talking about how people cannot afford groceries?
That's the people, who you think make "good money".
People told you how expensive Florida is. It costs up to $1000/month
to insure a basic home there. Then Ђ15/hr pays for NOTHING.
Florida is a risky place to live in, because it has a high risk of hurricanes.
But, that's the same for most of the East coast. The West coast is at risk of earthquakes and tsunamis. In the middle of the US, you have Tornado Alley. Then there are lots of areas, scattered over about two-thirds of your country, that have a high wildfire risk. Basically, there are only a few states that have
a low risk of natural disasters, where home insurance should be cheaper.
alot of it stems from developers putting houses in low places because the land is cheap and car owners that want to get rid of their car payments so they leave their cars in low places to be flooded out. companys can replace their fleet vehicles if they just park them in the back lot beside the creek and so on. crooked and stupid.
Of course insurance companies are fucking greedy too.
If they would be allowed to make 90% profit, they would.
Your supermarkets might be bigger on average. I don't know about Publix.
The median per capita income in Florida is about $41k. (says Google)
The median per capita income in the Netherlands is:
Ђ46,500 = $54,309 gross per year.
In my country, the average salary of an Albert Heijn location manager is:
Ђ59,405 = $69,375, on 40 hrs/week.
Maybe the difference is in education level. If there are not enough people qualified for the position of supermarket manager, then they can negotiate better pay. The job doesn't require rocket scientists, so in my country they make about 128% of median pay.
--------------------------------------- added after 7 minutes
I have thousands of pictures to show how great of place it is up there in the mountains and how I camp. I would recommend googling gatlinburg pictures and things to do there, you would be amazed
a local teen, 18 years old, just graduated high school. i have helped him out in regards to some good welding gloves,a 400 dollar jackson helmet and etc, he just took a job making 19 dollars a hour welding brackets on truck chassis. he will get a bonus at Christmas,works 4 10 hour days and can use the company welder for a personal project occasionally on his off hours. and it is not shabby equipment. pretty darn good for a kid, but he wants to work, and learn. it can be done, that is why i get sick of hearing and reading about all these obstacles. push them out of the way and get to it.
It's reasonable to expect welders getting payed well.
There is one issue though. You are referring to lots of jobs that pay well. Some pay better in Florida, than in The Netherlands.
The issue?
The median per capita income in Florida is about $41k. (says Google)
The median per capita income in the Netherlands is $54,309.
There must be a whole lot of people making LESS in Florida,
than in the Netherlands. What jobs are they doing?
only registered users can see external links
Marie Van Brittan Brown, an African American woman, invented the first home security system, which included the first closed-circuit television (CCTV) system. This system, patented in 1969, paved the way for modern CCTV security systems and is a significant contribution to home security technology, according to Princeton University. Brown's invention was motivated by her concerns about safety in her New York City neighborhood and the slow response times of the police
what threw a wrench in the gears is non religious types saying oh you don't have to do that, just as Johnson said mothers don't need fathers involved in raising the kids, here's a check, back in the 60's.
people nowadays think it is perfectly normal and acceptable to live above their means and expect debts forgiven for education and such. total lack of responsiablity.
That's called the 'naturalistic fallacy'. Sure, women have breasts for feeding children. That's why she stayed in the cave, while the man was out hunting mammoths. There is no good reason for it now.
You might be right that it was mostly the non-religious types. Why do you think religion is losing more supporters all the time? It's people are done with the ancient bullshit, that keeps people from having freedom.
You're literally saying that poor people don't deserve education.
Fine, destroy education. I'm done with the American Empire, and this helps
getting rid of it. Why do I even bother to support things that are good for the US?
Do you see any successful countries that only employ men?
That only happens in the Muslim 'shit-hole' countries, doesn't it?
It's another one of your ideas, of you giving up competing with the rest of the world.
why would women have breast to make milk if it was not their job to care for the young? does a calf go to the bull for food?
the only reason it doesn't work now is because of some people such as atheist pushing a narritive that goes against the grain of what has worked for centurys.
Do you think evolution decided that a woman's job is to care for the young,
so let's give her the breasts, instead of the man? That's the dumbest reverse logic that I ever heard. Obviously, the sex that has to push out the young, months after impregnation, has the breasts. The sex that inseminated the womb has likely already left. That's a bit unfortunate for the young, isn't it?
How can you expect a bull to feed the calves of all 30 cows in the herd?
This hasn't just worked for centuries, but for 225 million years, since the first mammals. The only reason for it was evolution. There is no design or reason for it,
it just supports the survival of the young better, which turns it into a fixed trait in all the descendants.
It's no longer relevant to modern civilization though. Maybe you don't know this,
but females don't breastfeed their children for the 18-30 years, until they can finally survive on their own, these days.
See, I completely confirm your premise, but not your conclusion,
because your logic is false. It's a 'naturalistic fallacy'.
It's natural to walk or ride a horse. Do you give up your car now?
It’s natural to get sick and die young. Do you refuse antibiotics?
It’s natural to write letters with a quill. Do you give up your smartphone?
It’s natural to fall and break bones. Should we stop building handrails?
It’s natural to hunt with spears. Do you refuse grocery stores?
Women want better for themselves too, and they won't wait
for some man to bring it.
Are you forgetting the subject mid-discussion?
how can parents raise kids if they are never around them? of course that is part of the big idea,break up the family. kids don't feel a obligation to care for their elderly parents because their parents hired out their own care when care when needed.
That was an eye opening video that presented staggering percentages! I wonder who collected the data and produced the video? Most likely a MAN!
I’ve lived long enough to realize what my strengths and weaknesses are and also to witness, first hand, that this is a man’s world!! Yep, it is a man’s world! I worked for mom and pop organizations as well as a major employer. When I worked for a family owned fruit and vegetable market, yes, I worked as a cashier and at the end of my shift, I had cleaning responsibilities ie sweeping and mopping the store (a designated area) as well as cleaning restrooms because that’s “women’s work”. At the office, yes, women could easily advance to the level of supervision however there weren’t many directors or above. Yes, we did have one female SR VP.
Personally, I’m not interested in construction jobs, sanitation, trucking or power/utilities BUT IF I WAS dammit, I want to be considered for that job! Considered not because I meet a benchmark quota but because I am QUALIFIED!
if so, here is some help,
The word "qualified" means:
Having the necessary skills, knowledge, or abilities: Someone who is qualified has met the requirements or standards for a particular job, role, or task. For example, a "qualified teacher" has the training and certifications needed to teach.
Meeting specific conditions or criteria: Refers to being officially recognized as suitable for something, like a "qualified candidate" who fulfills the prerequisites for a position or opportunity.
Limited or restricted in some way: When used in a legal or technical sense, it can mean something is conditional or not absolute, e.g., "qualified approval" means approval with reservations or conditions.
Just my opinion it’s not just women who are lazy, men are too! I’m a baby boomer, I worked for everything I have. I am not a descendent of Edsel P. Ford or Walter B. Chrysler II, I am the unmarried daughter of a high school teacher. I have what I have because I worked hard and saved money.
Times have changed and sadly men and women can be media influencers and receive money for doing nothing!
That's not equality.
Bella also said "not because I meet a benchmark quota".
on employers. I mostly agree with them.
They work to live, instead of live to work. That's not being lazy.
Why do all you people want us to be slaves?
Why don't we all work in cooperation, instead of in servitude?
is the fact that you get money for it, a reason to release all freedom?
We cannot be all self-employed, that's ridiculously inefficient.
How can you make a smartphone, car or house on your own?
A company adds a lot of efficiency to production. But it doesn't require relinquishing all freedom and individuality. That in fact HURTS effectiveness of the company.
Has 'the man' beaten you down so much, that you don't have wishes for a better future? If you don't, because you are old now, why should people who have a whole life ahead of them, agree with you?
The world that we are leaving Gen X, Y, Z is fucked up. We didn't do a good job.
Why do you think you have the right to tell them how to shape their future?
Will you just let your boss decide so much about your life?
Is that freedom?
Who has told you that this is how your working life is supposed to be?
Is that just 'common sense'? Who's 'common sense'?
Maybe you believe this, because the media has told you this, all your life.
Maybe the media has told you this all your life, because it serves their owners.
Who owns all your media? Isn't it big corporations and wealthy people?
All those people want you to be an obedient worker drone.
a human has needs. to fulfill those needs requires currency. to obtain currency you trade your time and skills for a amount of currency that is appropriate for the amount of skill and time you provide.
work is not fun,so it brings about currency, the currency is then used to fulfil needs.
when the needs are greater than the currency, more time and skill is traded for more currency until the need is met.
what part of this system is so hard for you to understand?
There is nothing else to it, that you are adding, that is necessary.
If there is no added value in the economy, no one 'obtains currency'.
It doesn't take skill, it doesn't have to be awful, it's only about adding value.
It's also not about trading time. Although time is a limited resource, no one
is paying anyone for their time, unless that time is creating ADDED VALUE.
Even if someone is 'supplying' a massage, that's added value to the one paying.
There is no skill required for getting fucked, but some people still pay for it.
Is it 'no fun' to write a book, sing a song or paint a painting? It's still a job.
As long as it creates added value, for enough people, it's a paying job.
"work is not fun"
WHY? You have provided ZERO arguments for why that should be.
You provide no argument for why that requires a boss.
You provide no argument for why the one working can't have demands.
You are providing no good reasons, only your petrified dogmas.
a boss makes sure the product or service is up to par.or there is no compensation for it.
a boss makes sure the employees come to work, and are drug free and safe to work and be around.
a boss makes sure the books are took care of .
so much a boss does that the regular line worker would not want to do without making even more money.
value?? what the fuck?
you want to eat right>? so you buy food. first you work to earn the money to buy the food,then you have to find food that you want,that someone made or grew. and you want to know it is ok to eat, so there is the need for the boss and others.
There are lots of successful worker co-operations. Employees aren't children. Sharing responsibility further down the organization results in much better outcomes for companies. I'm working for a company where the CEO is only presenting a strategy. Everyone below the CEO create their own goals, in co-operation with the one or two levels below, in line with the strategy and the goals above. That goes down to everyone in the chain, except for the cleaners and the canteen staff, who are contractors. Even our production staff has some goals. I get a voice in the goals of my department and I get to pick my goals. Some of them have been the same goals for years, because they feel like my children, but at least half of them are new. We also have lots of participation, flexibility and benefits. That keeps people happy, creative and efficient.
My added value is mostly cost reduction, and future value creation.
Yes, adding value, that's the whole principles of the economy.
Do you even understand why work results in money?
It's not because a boss likes to see you sweat or spend your time.
Damn, you're struggling with the absolute basics of economics.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
What Is Value Addition? - Learn About Economics
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Here’s a young fella that uploads content about his cat, Kurt and Kurt’s new cat brother, Gary. He’s shown pictures of his house and he and his wife aren’t living too shabby. Lots of followers means lots of advertisers, means nice paychecks for doing absolutely NOTHING!
only registered users can see external links
Enlighten me what is wrong? The Idiot has been in power for over 6 months. What should I shout for joy about?
So according to you, 50+% of the nation is wrong? That is democracy.
Thank your governor for me
I have a much more comfortable job. You couldn't do it though,
it requires advanced knowledge and logical thinking.
comfortable job you say? sitting behind a desk thinking about how to trim 2 cents here and a miligram of sheet rock dust there off a pills cost?
One mistake can result in throwing away millions of dollars worth of product.
Ever seen one of those big chemical plants, with miles of pipe? That's only a few processes running simultaneously, constantly for months on end, making only a few products in bulk. The operators working at such a plant should know their piece of the puzzle. Still, it's a simple process with hardly any instructions. Then there are the people in the back office who are called when there is something wrong, but they cannot figure out what it is, solve the problem and make sure it doesn't happen again. That's the team I work in. In a chemical plant, it would be a team of about 10 people. Another 10 would do maintenance, a smaller team would do redesign. It's simple compared to the processes I work in.
Our processes are many times more complex, we have many more of them, and we are running at least 80 of them together at a time. There are hundreds of instructions that all need to agree with each other. There are many more variables, because we don't have a simple chemical process, we are working with vulnerable living cells.
If one bacterium or mold enters the process, everything is scrap. Besides the troubleshooting, we are contently introducing new processes, new equipment, new instructions. There are constant inspections of governments from all over the world. They could want to do a deep investigation of anything that ever went wrong, because everything is documented, and every mistake requires a investigation and a corrective measure. If they don't like what we did, they can shut us down. Every tiny change we do, requires a documented change process, with a Quality Assurance department checking everything. That result in about 250 people actually making the product and about 1000 people supporting it in other ways. From that 1000 people, I'm definitely not the one with the most responsibilities, but I do have one of the most varied jobs.
I work with different specialists, working on several problems or projects at the same time, including some of my own. When it's a big project, it has at least 10 people from different departments working on it, often together with contractors from suppliers.
The most fun is taking on a small project, work together with a designer and an engineer and just think of a solution for a problem, design it, have it constructed and delivered and then implement it in the process, and see it used by operators.
That's the real test, because operators are not a careful bunch and not easy to please.
After that, you're the owner of that thing, for the rest of your career, supporting it when it breaks down, including its backup. It's fun, but it requires lots of patience.
I understand that, because I can imagine it.
You cannot image it for my job. You know so little about it that you think
that there's nothing to know.
That's called the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
Ice Cream
Scoop
Cone
There is some math involved
1 scoop 2 scoops or 3 scoops
The skill involved is being able to stack the scoops with out them falling off
Actually, that was me on Ice Cream duty.
The difference is that the freezers contain several hundred million dollars worth
of cell culture inoculate, in thousands of small vials, at maximum -292 °F.
It was a procedure that we had to do with at least 2 people. First you look through the window, to see if there's no one suffocating in the room. Open the door with my key-card, with special access. Vent the room (door open), until the O2 level is safe, without going in. If you faint, the door shuts itself. One operator stays back. The buddy is only there to call security, if something goes wrong. Officially, they are not even allowed to pull you out.
To get the freezer back online, we used a manual override plug, which we swapped out for a blind plug. That allows for filling up several freezers at once, while the O2 in the room goes down below alarm level. Of course, you don't go in then and you guard the door. When they are filled, you swap back the plugs, fill in and both sign off the logbook, and go back to work.
We didn't use the term "open loop mode". The room O2 level was called OOR (out of range). What we did was a "safety interlock bypass", which is only allowed under strict procedures. New rooms have such an overcapacity in venting, that we never get O2 alarms anymore. Working in those rooms still requires training and special access.
The rooms are under camera surveillance, because they would be a good target for sabotage. The damage to our production output could run in the billions.
wow, peace and quite, companionship,
only registered users can see external links
My belief is you have got to be happy with the version that you are currently in a relationship with. Thinking that the person will be “perfect (or better) if only…..” and thinking that you can be instrumental in orchestrating their change is so wrong! Their change will only happen when they truly want to change. How many movie stars, rock stars, TV personalities, local drug addicts, etc are you aware of who are admitted into whatever facility or program and fail multiple times? Some would continually fail and getting clean NEVER HAPPENS! Sadly, this happens all of the time! People/suitors need to realize and understand that they get what they get. So either accept it or get the heck out of the relationship.
number 10 hits home for me by the way i answered by pm instead of here a bit personal
but as for trying to help someone recover from dope and alky, yea, being family members were able to quit drinking cold turkey, i see no reason everyone can't. but some are determined to self destruct and you can't help them. i remembered this gal for what and who she was before a punk in my high school class got her hooked on pot then it became not enough. she was extremely smart, very attractive, green thumb, but once she got ahold of pot then dope at 17 it was a down hill spiral. sadly the 27th of this month her parents are going to court to try to pension the state to take over her care as they are elderly and she has turned violent again, she threw her 80 year old mother onto the floor in febuary and about killed her. she is tied to a hospital bed as i type. that 3rd suicide attempt about did the trick,but it ruined her brain instead.
wow, peace and quite, companionship,
only registered users can see external links
--------------------------------------- added after 29 seconds
.
--------------------------------------- added after 43 seconds
.
can't think of anyone that resembles anyone in this video, but at the 1 minute mark the fellow does speak the truth.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
This video begins by showing an older man who is apparently dying. The person who is documenting the event pans the room that is filled with family and friends who are waiting for him to draw his last breath. Why are there 3 people on their phones? Are they checking to see whether their lottery ticket was a winner? Who in the frick uploads this kinda stuff and WHY?
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
It ain’t no joke when it comes time to pay that note
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Crying about propaganda in classrooms and then literally do that.
PragerU is one of the worst partisan conservative filth channels in the world.
PragerU claimed "Being taken as a slave is better than being killed"
Instead of presenting them with clicks (find it yourself if you need),
here is the common sense reaction to that idea:
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
i don't mind a idea like this for the handicapped but normal people shouldn't be this lazy
um, i think some of us have mentioned this before,so it is real
only registered users can see external links
just a random murder and attempted murder,stopped by a gun .
only registered users can see external links
4.40,good question, won't cook or make em a sandwich but uses the man for sex.
Women are not property, they are other human beings.
Don't expect them to make your damn sandwiches. Be a grown-up!
some women understand that you work together to make a relation ship work but most don't. they have the pussy and you shall serve them like slaves to get any.
1 thing that i can agree with liberals on is prostitution should be legal. it would be much cheaper to pay 50 bucks once in a while than to have to buy flowers, jeweler, clothes ,houeses ,cars and etc, just to get a piece once a week and hen pecked the rest .
but in my country men and women do work together to make a relationship.
We work together, care for children together, do housework together.
Still many women chose to care more than the men. Freely, not compulsory.
Sex is something you share together. If it's some reward, you're not doing it right.
My girlfriend doesn't make the same money as I do, but she definitely doesn't spend more on herself than she brings in. We have shared financial goals for the future.
I bring in most of the money for that, I do most of the financial planning, but I do not sacrifice more luxury, comfort or spare time, than she does. We contribute to our future luxury, comfort or spare time together.
Also, my country has had right-wing politics in power for decades now.
Almost everything important is privatized in my country.
The only thing we do (still) have is some more social benefits.
Why we still have that, is because right-wing voters want to keep it.
Right-wing populists are promising left-wing benefits, like no increase on the retirement age, eliminating the deductible on health insurance, a rent-increase-freeze or subsistence security. However, when they get into power, they forget everything they promised, but it still makes it very difficult for them to actively destroy the social benefits that we have had for many decades now. They have to walk a tight rope.
The term 'equality' doesn't mean something different in different systems.
A strong short definition is: “Equality is the fair treatment of all people, giving them
the same rights, opportunities, and respect regardless of differences.”
If men earn more than women, for the same job, with the same performance, that is not 'equality', unless there are other job rewards for women, that men don't get, compensating for the difference in pay. You could say maternity leave is one of them, but equality is respecting differences. Society should not punish women for having
a womb and the burden to keep humanity from extinction.
If I have to speculate, then I say it's mostly a cultural thing. When a culture accepts the inequality, than it will result in the inequality, because employers will never pay more than they need to. Their bottom line is maximizing profit. If a culture doesn't accept the inequality, they will demand social rules and laws enforcing equality. It's that simple.
If you vote for a politician who outlaws DEI, you're basically saying: "We don't care about equality!". The result will be growing inequality.
not to mention all the time they have to take off to carry the kid to the dr and sport events and so forth. a man goes to work in the morning and goes home at the end of the day. no monthly periods, no need for maternity leave and so on. thus being more productive and a better investment of training and funds.
that is not to say women can't do the same job as a man in Most cases. but there is justification in difference in pay in most cases
you LIKE inequality. It doesn't matter if pregnancy is a choice, it's ONLY a choice
for women, which is a factor to consider, in relation to equality.
At least you can consider pregnancy a choice, but that's not an argument for the menstrual period. They indeed are quite affected in that period, which probably does affect their productivity. That's EXACTLY why equality means considering that as a factor, although a small one, that needs to be compensated.
If men were bleeding from their dicks every month,
we would have 4 days off from work every month.
Did you even read the definition of equality? You seem to not understand.
What do you think the "regardless of differences" part is about?
You're the one who kept yammering about 'men' in female sports.
How about women NOT being allowed to have 'equality' in sports?
"Sorry ladies, it's just fair that you lose in basketball from Shaquille O'Neal."
"What? Do you think you deserve special treatment? Sports is a CHOICE!"
woman needs to change pad every so often,what does a man do that is equal?
woman has 4 days of evil each month, what does a man have that is equal?
What do men do or are affected with, to make them less effective for their employer? Here are some examples:
Higher rates of risky behavior and injury — Men are statistically more likely to take physical risks, get into workplace accidents, or engage in dangerous hobbies that can lead to missed work days.
Shorter average lifespan — Men tend to die younger on average, which could mean (by that same twisted reasoning) less long-term return on training investment.
Higher incidence of certain health problems — Men have higher rates of heart disease and certain other conditions that can impair work capacity.
Lower performance in multitasking — Research shows that, on average, women often outperform men in multitasking and some forms of complex communication — skills relevant in many modern jobs.
That's not just a few days per month, that men are less effective than women.
but that would mean a society run by women would be different.
It would be brains over brawn, instead of the other way around.
I also think it would be a more peaceful society.
Men have fucked up this world pretty hard. Women wouldn't do that.
Men might have built a lot of things, but we are also very good at destruction.
because we would already have it.
Are you able to understand this very simple concept?
“Equality is the fair treatment of all people, giving them the same rights, opportunities, and respect REGARDLESS OF DIFFERENCES.”
The principle is that it is unfair to have people suffer consequences
for circumstances they have no control over, like being born a woman
or being born black or being born with poor parents or being disabled.
I know you disagree with that principle. You can explain your principle
until you're blue in the face, but it's not a lack of understanding, it's a difference in moral principles between us.
You keep focusing on the equality between men and women, but that is not the worst equality problem. The real problem is that some people make 500X more money than the people who work for them. Are those people 500X stronger? ALL of them have a "sissyfied office job". According to your own logic, they shouldn't make more money than the people who do the ACTUAL work, with their big brawny muscles, because they are probably weaker than some women. Can you explain that, without flipping your principles to something else?
stop expecting the worker to keep up the lazy, and the rich to keep up the lazy.
work,earn,enjoy, simple
Do you think they risk going hungry? Workers do, every single day.
Their bosses control their livelihoods 24/7. What risks do billionaires have? If they do something stupid, they fire all their employers and sell the parts of their investments. Often, even the government comes to their aid. During Covid, Trump dumped trillions of tax-dollars on them,
to save them from any losses and they became even wealthier, while people were waiting in food-lines and were at risk of losing their homes.
You really need to purge this dump propaganda from your brain.
Billionaires don't work, they have people work for them. It's the easiest job in the world, it only takes money, to make more money.
The only skill that the wealthiest of them have is talking a good game.
There is millions of people who can do that.
I predicted you would flip your arguments. First, how much you should earn is completely dependent on how much a person produces and now all the sudden it is dependent on taking more risk, by investing your money or investing in yourself and putting your ideas and labor out there. Any reason to say that women can't do that?
i can't explain why some people are content doing little as possible to survive. that is lack of motivation perhaps?
In your country, most people work their asses off.
It's not lack of motivation, it's lack of opportunity.
When you're born as a serf in the US, their is almost no chance
of becoming a lord. The lords made sure of that, with your support.
that is bullshit that opportunity is not there. it just not taken by most. to lazy and no desire for improvement.
Netherlands: ~32.4 hours/week
Austria: ~33.7 hours/week
Germany and Denmark: ~34–34.6 hours
In one breath you call Americans lazy, in the other you are telling me that many American make it from rags to riches. You don't present statistics, you present anecdotal evidence. First of all Lee Iacocca is ancient history by now. Back then, there was still a lot of opportunity in the US. Your politics has destroyed that opportunity. It made education unaffordable, it destroyed small businesses and it gave the wealthy a dominant position to kick people, who try to make it, back down. Amazon is literally selling products under cost, until their competition is dead. Then they have a monopoly, so they can raise the price of the product to whatever they want.
How many times have I presented you the 'opportunity' data?
The US is 27th in the world. The top 10 countries are:
Denmark
Norway
Finland
Sweden
Iceland
Switzerland
Netherlands
Belgium
Austria
Luxembourg
You have supported the idea that entrepreneurship is the best way to make it big, right? In the US, self-employment percentage is 10.1%. In my country it's 16.8%.
Self-employed also are van drivers, who get exploited like crazy.
In my country, there are still many more Lee Iacoccas than in yours.
What mostly remains in the US, is from riches to kings, like Elon.
He came to your country with blood-emerald mine money.
The top 10 richest people all came from families that could support their higher education.
1. Elon Musk: Studied physics and economics at the University of Pennsylvania.
2. Larry Ellison: Studied computer science at the University of Illinois and the University of Chicago.
3. Jeff Bezos: Degrees in electrical engineering and computer science from Princeton University.
4. Mark Zuckerberg: Studied computer science at Harvard University.
5. Steve Ballmer: Graduated from Harvard University with a degree in mathematics and economics.
6. Larry Page: Degree in computer science from the University of Michigan.
7. Jensen Huang: Studied electrical engineering at Oregon State University and Stanford University.
8. Sergey Brin: Degree in mathematics and computer science from the University of Maryland and also studied at Stanford University.
9. Warren Buffett: Studied at the University of Pennsylvania and Columbia Business School.
10. Bernard Arnault: Studied at the Йcole Polytechnique.
No poor family can pay for an education like they all had.
Here is a review of her debate about women's sexual freedom, with some feminists.
only registered users can see external links
Why do the people who represent your opinions feel the need to lie so much?
Can't they find anything that's true, supporting your opinions?
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
--------------------------------------- added after 10 hours
The word that was censored is Z00
Obviously people who donate their chicken, rabbit or guinea pig, don't.
Chickens, rabbits and guinea pigs are eaten by humans, so why not lions?
They are not asking for dogs and cats, which are only pets in the civilized world.
I agree that it's weird, but I think it's also educational.
There is no difference between a pet chicken and a livestock chicken.
They have the same ability to suffer and be afraid.
That's why I support regulation to reduce the suffering of livestock animals.
Do you do that? Or do you only have feelings for pets?
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
The Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.".
That's the 'Tangerine Traitor' right now.
Still, I hope ICE taken in by his t-shirt. Many people like him are already deported.
They don't even think you're an American if you're "Born In The USA", right now.
By the way, how old is his video? 2020 is a long time ago? Is he still in the US?
Or is he re-considering his life's choices in a prison in a swamp or in El Salvador?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notable Cases of Immigrant Soldiers or Veterans Detained by ICE:
Marlon Parris – A green card holder and Iraq War veteran, Parris was detained by ICE shortly after Trump’s reinauguration. Despite having served two tours and receiving explicit reassurance from ICE (including a letter stating he would not be deported), that protection was disregarded, and he was taken into custody.
George Retes – A disabled U.S. military veteran and U.S. citizen, Retes was detained during a farm raid in Southern California in July 2025. He identified himself as a U.S. citizen but was nonetheless subjected to pepper spray, tear gas, had his car window smashed, and was held in custody for three days without legal representation or medical care. He was finally released on July 13, 2025.
We know about them, because they got out and were able to tell about it.
Many legal immigrants have just disappeared.
New Mexico: 48 Missing Residents - In March 2025, ICE raids in Albuquerque, Santa Fe, and Roswell led to the arrest of 48 New Mexico residents, many of whom were legal immigrants with no criminal records.
The ACLU of New Mexico filed a complaint alleging all 48 have effectively “disappeared,” as ICE has not identified where they're being held, or if they can access legal counsel or family members.
“What we know is people in our community are gone, workers are gone, family members are gone, our neighbors are gone.”
only registered users can see external links
Nationwide Fear of Disappearance
In Wisconsin, immigrants, many without criminal records, are increasingly expressing fears of being "disappeared" by ICE. Attorneys note that rapid detentions, inadequate legal access, and lack of transparency are fueling these fears.
"Disappeared in America" - A national effort dubbed “Disappeared in America” highlights disturbing incidents involving legal residents, such as Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University student, and Andry Hernбndez Romero, who were detained or deported without due process or notice.
only registered users can see external links
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repost of the Washington Post article “Here are the U.S. citizens caught in Trump’s immigration crackdown”
only registered users can see external links
“Could You Prove You’re a Citizen?”
only registered users can see external links
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trump promised to end birthright citizenship by executive order
On December 8, 2024, during an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, Trump declared:
"We have to end it… We’re going to end that because it’s ridiculous," referring to birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment.
Executive Order 14160: Upon taking office on January 20, 2025, he signed
Executive Order 14160, "Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship.”
This order attempted to reinterpret the 14th Amendment, asserting that children born in the U.S. to parents who are in the country illegally or legally but temporarily (such as on a student or tourist visa), and whose other parent was not a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, should not automatically receive citizenship.
Supreme Court—Trump praises ruling curbing nationwide injunctions.
On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled 6–3 to limit lower courts’ power to issue nationwide injunctions. Trump greeted this as a “monumental victory for the Constitution” and criticized what he saw as federal courts blocking executive power. He also argued that birthright citizenship “was meant for the babies of slaves,” claiming the current interpretation had strayed from original intent.
only registered users can see external links
i would try to defend my neighbors and myself if we are attacked but no i would go over seas to fight someone elses war
Gallup International Association (March 2024)
• In the U.S., only 41% said they would be willing to fight if their country were attacked, while 34% said they would not — with 25% undecided.
Still a lot higher, but somewhat disappointing from a people who are taught as children
to salute the flag, start the day by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance and listen to
the National Anthem before every sports game.
without their efforts these people that won't fight ,wouldn't have the privilege of a choice to fight, it would be chaos like in the middle east for centuries on end.
The 'right' to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?
Their elders and ancestors sacrificed for democracy and freedom.
You are throwing that away like yesterday's newspaper.
There is nothing that the middle east would bring, that you wouldn't.
Trump went to Saudi Arabia and was jealous of how their people were obedient.
you can in the US because you have equal rights and 1 thru 12 education covered by tax dollars same as everyone else.
because they think they have freedom over there. Putin is their idol.
Equal rights? In the US?
Making it, is about opportunity. 1 thru 12 education isn't equal opportunity.
Sure, it's still possible to "make it" in the US, but more difficult than in 26
other countries. The "American Dream" is literally just a dream.
There is an index for how easy it is to "pull yourself up by the boot straps",
it's called the Global Social Mobility Index (GSMI).
China passed you in 2020. Then China was 26th in the world and the US was 27th.
🤯
only registered users can see external links
Since everything is DEI to you, except clear racism, that's rather cryptic.
Not paying enough taxes is a good reason to boycott a company.
Do you LIKE paying more taxes, because the wealthy get away with cheating?
Anywho, I can't join them, I had never even heard of Lowe's.
I usually buy at Hornbach, Gamma, Praxis, Karwei or Bauhaus.
There are like 15 big DIY stores within a 10 mile radius around me.
I wouldn't suffer much, if I needed to boycott one.