@BigDuck Do they all specifically go out to buy sunglasses for their profile pictures?
I really hope they make capital gains tax the same as the regular income tax. Not because I want higher taxes, but because most of the fucks who are bankrolling politicians who call for higher taxes on regular income or high levels of deficit spending live off of capital gains. Fuck 'em. They love taxes so much, let them pay the taxes they want everyone else paying.
@djsumdog @mermaid @Commeownder @Godcast @JSDorn @LoliKing @LouisConde @fluffy @nerdman @philmchawk needs moar screens.
@RandolphScott Pretty sure that's a 2016 Toyota Corolla LE. If someone passed you, it's because you let them.
It's the internet. People treat it like it's the play center at McDonalds when it's actually more like the play center at the rehab center -- you don't want to leave your kids unsupervised and you probably don't want to be getting to friendly with anyone who comes up to talk to you...
There's no justice
like mob justice
it's the greatest little justice I know
But baby don't you see
It'll never happen to me
because I'm so unbelievably woke
Lynch mobs do great jobs
of determining the guilt of the accused
So just don't be someone we don't like
like a [redacted] or a [redacted]
And maybe it won't happen to you!
like mob justice
it's the greatest little justice I know
But baby don't you see
It'll never happen to me
because I'm so unbelievably woke
Lynch mobs do great jobs
of determining the guilt of the accused
So just don't be someone we don't like
like a [redacted] or a [redacted]
And maybe it won't happen to you!
@arh I've been raising the exact same issue this whole time consistently, and I'm not raising nuclear weapons as a counter-accusation, I'm raising it as part of the original point. You can't be raising a different issue if it's literally your original issue.
If you're trying to say that tear gas is horrible, say that tear gas is horrible, and stop using the propaganda. At this point, the propaganda is so ubiquitous makes people turn off their brains and stop paying attention to you.
Once you pointed out that tear gas is horrible and it's odd that it's used so much on protesters, I actually agreed with you.
If you're trying to say that tear gas is horrible, say that tear gas is horrible, and stop using the propaganda. At this point, the propaganda is so ubiquitous makes people turn off their brains and stop paying attention to you.
Once you pointed out that tear gas is horrible and it's odd that it's used so much on protesters, I actually agreed with you.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/budget-2021-government-unveils-101-4b-in-new-spending-with-deficit-declining-1.5393525
When your taxes go way up and all the social programs you rely on disappear, remember this: you asked for it. Instead of going through the pain we decided to put everything on our credit card. Well tomorrow we're going to have nothing but credit card payments, and all the fun things that we bought this year will be repossessed.
When your taxes go way up and all the social programs you rely on disappear, remember this: you asked for it. Instead of going through the pain we decided to put everything on our credit card. Well tomorrow we're going to have nothing but credit card payments, and all the fun things that we bought this year will be repossessed.
@arh that's not what "whataboutism" is. That's where when one side of a political debate does something bad the other side of the political debate says "well what about this thing that you're doing?"
That's not what I'm doing here.
What I'm doing is showing that your premise is incorrect and reinforcing my point. Saying something is banned in war does not say that it is necessarily a particularly horrible or dangerous weapon, it just says that it's banned. Almost all of the worst weapons in the history of humanity are totally legal for use on the battlefield, making bringing up a particular weapon's status as banned or not irrelevant. Tear gas might be banned, but bullets, bombs, fire bombs, nuclear weapons, grenades, howitzers, artillery, tanks, gattling guns and Vulcan cannons are all totally legal. Given a choice between being hit with the "illegal in war" tear gas and the "legal in war" Tzar Bomba (or even a legal in war bullet), anyone would choose the tear gas 100 times out of 100. Thus a weapon's status as lawful or unlawful under the rules of war is irrelevant to whether it's specifically dangerous or not.
That's not what I'm doing here.
What I'm doing is showing that your premise is incorrect and reinforcing my point. Saying something is banned in war does not say that it is necessarily a particularly horrible or dangerous weapon, it just says that it's banned. Almost all of the worst weapons in the history of humanity are totally legal for use on the battlefield, making bringing up a particular weapon's status as banned or not irrelevant. Tear gas might be banned, but bullets, bombs, fire bombs, nuclear weapons, grenades, howitzers, artillery, tanks, gattling guns and Vulcan cannons are all totally legal. Given a choice between being hit with the "illegal in war" tear gas and the "legal in war" Tzar Bomba (or even a legal in war bullet), anyone would choose the tear gas 100 times out of 100. Thus a weapon's status as lawful or unlawful under the rules of war is irrelevant to whether it's specifically dangerous or not.
@arh the comparison is built into the framing device. Instead of saying "tear gas is bad", the propaganda says "tear gas is a banned chemical weapons under the rules of war". The intention is to compare tear gas to other banned chemical weapons.
It all comes back to the same thing. The reason that war law is even brought up is that there's this idea that in war everything must be permissible so anything that's against the rules of war must be so incredibly terrible. In reality, many scholars and writers have written about the paradox of non-lethal weapons, that on the battlefield the law of war prefers you kill your enemy to incapacitating them.
This goes back to my original point when I asked if police should use the totally legal methods of guns and bombs. "This is illegal under the laws of war" isn't meaningful. You aren't following the laws of war, and a whole lot of rioters would be executed under the laws of war if they did. Referring to a body of law that isn't applicable is a specific choice made by propagandists then spread through media channels to individuals to distort issues and create division between people who would otherwise agree.
That's the ultimate point of most of this propaganda. It isn't to change views in any specific direction, it's to sow division. It's to take things we all agree on or can all agree on and turn them into wedge issues so that we're all divided. The rich and powerful are not divided. They are all working together to drive us apart because then they can twist the things we care about to get what they want, and what they want has nothing to do with tear gas.
It all comes back to the same thing. The reason that war law is even brought up is that there's this idea that in war everything must be permissible so anything that's against the rules of war must be so incredibly terrible. In reality, many scholars and writers have written about the paradox of non-lethal weapons, that on the battlefield the law of war prefers you kill your enemy to incapacitating them.
This goes back to my original point when I asked if police should use the totally legal methods of guns and bombs. "This is illegal under the laws of war" isn't meaningful. You aren't following the laws of war, and a whole lot of rioters would be executed under the laws of war if they did. Referring to a body of law that isn't applicable is a specific choice made by propagandists then spread through media channels to individuals to distort issues and create division between people who would otherwise agree.
That's the ultimate point of most of this propaganda. It isn't to change views in any specific direction, it's to sow division. It's to take things we all agree on or can all agree on and turn them into wedge issues so that we're all divided. The rich and powerful are not divided. They are all working together to drive us apart because then they can twist the things we care about to get what they want, and what they want has nothing to do with tear gas.
https://globalnews.ca/news/7768754/rogers-outage-canada-customers-internet-phone/amp/
I feel for whoever has to explain this! National phone outage and I'm sure the poor bastard responsible did his due diligence beforehand!
I feel for whoever has to explain this! National phone outage and I'm sure the poor bastard responsible did his due diligence beforehand!