domain:x.com
greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
3hr ago
Same for DJT stock, which is surging based on possibly renewed hopes for Trump
ToaKraka
Dislikes you
3hr ago
Misspelling of BDS (boycott, divest from, and sanction [Israel])
Because the argument wouldn't be as effective if I were the one to provide a link.
If someone is actually interested in whether Hamas uses child soldiers, they can very trivially google "Hamas Child Soldiers" and find multiple reports on the history by organizations including Amnesty International, Child Soldiers International, and the United Nations, among others. This doesn't even include self-publicized material such as from the Hamas Youth Wing. These aren't even 'new' reporting- there are easily observable reports from the early 2000s during the tail end of the Intifada years to late last decade, well before the current conflict. Any observer of the conflict with any significant experience has read any one of these over the last few decades- they are old news, not particularly controversial, and numerous.
The reminder of the existence of such reporting isn't just the function any link would provide- it is remind the reader of past reports they've heard of and can easily find again (thus appealing to their own understanding of the conflict), and thus the contrast to the OP's dogmatic dismissal of contrary evidence published over the last decades. Their own trust in their own memories and experience is the legitimizer of the position.
While nominally the target doesn't work as well on people not as experienced in the topic, the prompt that they could easily search for it serves a second level of argument, in which if they do look they will find, and their ability to find evidence of child soldiers if they choose to look for it will be contrasted with the OP's dismissal. This, too, utilizes their agency in the search to bolster the argument.
People who refused to do the search, as a third category, in turn expose themselves to audiences one and two, and thus discredit the OP's objection even fuller when people who are aware recognize they are denying international records that aren't obscure.
None of these three layers of effect would be as effective if a link is simply provided, which can be dismissed on the basis of coming from a partisan regardless of what reference was linked to. The searcher's own agency is what legitimizes the discovery.
Additionally, there is a fourth level, which is a rhetorical trap for the less aware if someone tries to do a surface-level search. One of the easy top-searches is a past UN report that also criticizes Israel for 'child soldier' use (primarily in the context of proximity when searching tunnels / etc.). If this were to be raised in a way to try and establish moral equivalence between Hamas and Israel, not only would a choice to focus on that report validate the relevance of child soldiers as a mitigating circumstance (by acknowledging that the children are not necessarily automatically moral innocents in a combatant sense), but it would also be a demonstratation of a motive for why someone besides Israel might have shot the children (as in, rather than be shot by the Israelis, they are shot because they are associated with the Israelis).
This snare was non-central to the point on the ease of finding evidence that the OP looked to, but was on hand to use if pulled, which again would not work as well if proactively linked to and explained by myself.
charles
3hr ago
I've actually been personally pleased by many of the recent SCOTUS rulings that have many libs so worked up, but I do think there is an issue that needs to be addressed here. Not necessarily term limits; I think there should be a maximum age with forced retirement for the SCOTUS, Congress, and the President. The SCOTUS is probably the smaller problem here; the Executive and the Senate being more impactful. Personally I think 75 is probably workable, but I'd be fine with 70, or even younger. My opinion of their politics aside, people like Feinstein, Ginsberg, or Thurmond clinging lich-like to the power and status of their political office far beyond their ability to be a useful, or even coherent, public servants is sickening. Feinstein was especially bad. Biden probably would have done the same thing if he won a second term, with all the same enablers giving him the same bad-faith cover they gave Feinstein. Anyone under the cut off can run for the office and finish the term, then they retire. Presidents that pass the maximum age in their first term cannot run for a second. This would need to be in the constitution, just like the minimum ages are, which means its probably extremely unlikely as it would require the cooperation of the very people who's damage it seeks to limit. This problem will only get worse in the next 20 years; Boomers will never willingly relinquish even the smallest scrap of power and status. I apologize for the tone of this post.
ThisIsSin
The boob tube emits harmful XXX-rays
4hr ago
What is anti-ABS? While I do know that being against mandatory anti-lock braking systems is a sure sign you vote R, for some reason I don’t think that’s what you mean.
Did you predict the 2022 special military exercise?
I assume you mean the Russian one? Sure. I was noting they still weren't committed until they were, but I was one of the realtively people on the forums arguing that the invasion threat was credible and shouldn't be dismissed because of visible factors. It was a relatively minority position back then due to European inclinations to reference the Iraq War intelligence failures / this was American fearmongering / a very memorable denunciation that I knew nothing of slavic brotherhood.
I wasn't sure if the intervention would be tailored to the Donbass and if the other forces were diversionary (they did appear to be too small for a full invasion, but enough for a significant impact), and I believed (and still do) that Putin might have pulled back at the time if he got some of the geopolitical concessions he was angling for at the time (like the Nord Stream pipeline completion). I even thought Ukraine would crumple.
But I was very much against 'this is just another drill.'
What were the visible actions that were not part of the historical pattern of exercises-that-were-not-starts-of-war?
Among other things fact that the Russians had left equipment near Ukraine in 2021, and then not taken it back home with them, allowing it to be proximal and staged so that when they did the 2021 exercise it was building up new force capabilities that were far beyond normal levels. This was significant because when Russia or equivalent countries do a military exercise, they generally don't actually bring enough to do a full invasion and it's visible from orbit. The fact that Russia didn't take it's equipment back home, but then brought in another small army's worth of stuff, and then kept bring more stuff in, was the visibly apparent 'they have an invasion-scale force assembled' which they didn't need if they were 'just' doing exercises.
Additionally, 2021 had multiple developments that correlated with pre-conflict shaping, including a massive pre-invasion propaganda campaigns both against Ukraine (fake nation, nazi narratives) and international legitimization by framing it against NATO (the NATO infrigement/withdrawal demands), the European energy non-refil in which they didn't go through their normal practice of filling European gas stocks during the summer per normal practices, and there was the Russian dynamic behind the Belarusian migrant crisis which was a challenge / shaping perceptions of the new German government.
There wasn't some big propaganda push afaik,
You misremember. The propaganda campaigns were in 2021 mostly, but they were very consistent with pre-war justificaiton narratives, on three grounds- trying to prep the target population (we are you liberators / brothers freeing you from despotic rule), the home population (Russia is standing up for itself for historical Russian brotherhood and territory), and internationally (are war is historically justified and also it's NATO's fault).
and neither was there a withdrawal of the hundreds of billions in economic funds that subsequently got trapped in western banks.
The Russian funds were frozen, but the anamolous economic behavior pre-invasion was the effort to increase European dependence on Russian imports through supply chain artificial shortages of gas.
Notably, in turn, the Russian funds not being immediately moved was a reflection of how the Russians thought the conflict would go (a quick fait accompli the Europeans would ascede to), which has generally been understood to be a mistake for a long-war (which a Taiwan blockade would likely be).
ThisIsSin
The boob tube emits harmful XXX-rays
4hr ago
I’ve always figured that weed is a drug that imposes a heavy underclock on your brain and allows direct access for parts of your consciousness that aren’t meant to talk directly to each other.
Alcohol, by contrast, just removes some impulse control and makes motor functions more difficult, but those things turn off “silently” by comparison (and re-enable themselves quickly by comparison, whereas weed has a day of latency).
You don’t think slower on alcohol, you just have a harder time executing. Stoners, by comparison, are very apparently down-clocked.
FiveHourMarathon
Just a Wawa Stan Account
4hr ago
Why don't more Americans change their names? It's very easy to do so, procedures are simple, and unless you have a felony there's few restrictions.
And there's a lot of people out there saddled with TERRIBLE given names.
So why is it so rare?
it_is_so_weird_to_be
4hr ago
Do you think you're on reddit or something?
ThisIsSin
The boob tube emits harmful XXX-rays
4hr ago
Polls are destructive tests: once you conduct one and announce the results, the value changes.
GaBeRockKing
4hr ago
Most violence happens within the ingroup. 54.3 percent or people murdered were killed by someone they knew. The same doesn't exactly hold for assassinations, but there's a trend of assassins having more in common with their targets than their targets' political enemies. Charles J. Guiteau was definitely on Garfield's "side." Lee Harvey Oswald was closer politically to Kennedy than Nixon. John Hinckley Jr was nonpolitical, but at the same time had been attempting to become an entertainer.
And given how the US presidency works-- with the designated survivor being the vice president-- this really makes perfect sense. If you hate the president, replacing him with a vice president you also hate that meanwhile becomes much more radically against you is a terrible idea. But showing "your side" that they shouldn't risk betraying your cause/better go even further in your direction makes more sense.
With all that being said, I wouldn't blame specifically trump for the assassination attempts since it's not like his rhetoric exists in a vacuum. But it's not like we're not seeing equivalent forms of radicalism in the democratic base. See: BLM, pro-palestine protestors sabotaging their own side. Trump's base just happens to be more male, more armed, and therefore more violent.
Folamh3
4hr ago
Last year, a former moderator @ymeskhout wrote a two-parter describing how he used the current conflict as an opportunity to educate himself about Israel-Palestine, a topic about which he'd been fairly ignorant prior (despite being a Moroccan who was raised Muslim), and came away far more sympathetic to the Israeli side than he expected to. I was also fairly ignorant about the conflict when I first read these posts, and found them very persuasive with little to disagree with:
- https://www.ymeskhout.com/p/the-jewish-conspiracy-to-change-my
- https://www.ymeskhout.com/p/follow-up-on-that-jewish-conspiracy
On the pro-Palestine side of the debate, Sam Kriss is a Jewish writer based in London who is firmly anti-Zionist and believes that Israel does not have a right to exist. I found this post of his very affecting even if I didn't necessarily agree with all of it:
aardvark2
4hr ago
i suspect this advice is for people where 'variety' means that protein needs are exceeded by animal protein alone, maybe even by two-fold or more. a lot of plant foods are deficient in lysine, so it can occur so 5 foods in a meal are all deficient.
Potato has low amount of protein, maybe it's better to eat food that is higher in protein even if its score is slightly lower?
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4hr ago
I’ll go one further. I don’t think any poll is actually trying to figure out who will win so much as to convince the electorate of whatever the polling centers want to be true. There’s really no reason to bother with them other than to see if anything is changing within the narrative.
GaBeRockKing
4hr ago
I think that's a direct restatement of what DirtyWaterHotDog said. Was that your intention, or were you trying to argue with him?
GaBeRockKing
5hr ago
I respect the self-consistency here. Guns AND drugs-- no dividing them! Either people have a right to hurt themselves or they don't. Though like the nanny-state liberal I am, I want pigouvian taxes on both guns and drugs. The average citizen should be able to afford LSD and an M82, but pistols and wrapping papers should be way more expensive.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
5hr ago
Yeah, I can imagine. Still:
- I don't know if I want to fuck around with that stuff after my experience
- It's still terrifying to realize I got the equivalent of black-out / vomit-all-over-the-place drunk, on what you're telling me is the equivalent of a single can of Bud Light. I wonder how I'd react if my first hit was the stuff you have in the US.
FiveHourMarathon
Just a Wawa Stan Account
5hr ago
I probably profile as a "young man" for their software models and i get near constant ads built around vote for Trump because of Crypto/Zyns/Sports Gambling.
GaBeRockKing
5hr ago
Until we get annexation of metropolitan areas it's just going to be like this.
If you're advocating for this policy on the basis of culture-war reasons, prepare to be dissapointed. If you're advocating for this policy on the basis of being part of a non-urbanite interest group, prepare to be very dissapointed. In the short run you'd probably stand to benefit, which is why I as an urbanite would oppose you. But in the long run I think I'd get the last laugh.
The ultimate redpill is that none of this culture war stuff actually matters. It's all just cynical economic interest groups. The republicans are the rural party, the democrats are the urban party, and that's been true since they were called "Federalists" and "Democratic-republicans." And, historically, integrating provincial/national and metropolitan governments tends to benefit urbanites, not rurals. Consider the likely results of removing the electoral college as being illustrative. Or look at paris/france, rome/rome, vienna/austria, moscow/russia, etc.
Some states are disproportionately rural/suburban and to have their power balanced between multiple cities. In those cases, it's actually feasible for a rural/suburban coalition to partially dominate the urban areas. See: the missouri state government's control over Kansas City's police force. But that's ultimately a fragile equilibrium given anticipated climate-change driven migration from heavily urbanized coastal areas plus the new ideological YIMBY trend towards densification. Our future is destined to be more urban, not less-- even actual degrowth would hollow out suburbs and rural areas first. (See: what's happening in Japan.) Any effective attempt to oppress urbanites will just motivate people to move to rural/suburban areas and mold them in their image.
Ironically a republican success on immigration would only boost this trend. More homogenous cultures accommodate denser living-- the reverse of what caused the original white flight/suburbanization. It doesn't actually matter what that culture ultimately ends up being. Democrats would adapt to serve it, and then turn around to put their boots on ruralite necks.
2rafa
5hr ago
First time smoking weed is like being a kid and getting drunk for the first time, it happens on two beers or a glass of wine. You build up tolerance to a much higher baseline pretty quickly.
FiveHourMarathon
Just a Wawa Stan Account
5hr ago
This feels like sophistry. No negative social consequences that result from alcohol will result from people home brewing weak berry wines. The bad stuff, alcoholism etc, happens because of readily available distilled liquor and beer in volume.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
5hr ago
It's not common, but it's also not terribly smart for a civilization to knowingly and intentionally bring into the world babies with such severe deficiencies.
Surely you could say the same about any pregnancy where one or both parents have a serious hereditary condition?
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
5hr ago
Apples are harder to ferment nicely than other fruits/berries due to the high levels of pulp and pectin in them. Every time I make cider dealing with the pulp is a huge pain in the ass, and it varies by apple variety as well. Berries are much easier to manage and generate much less pulp, and since they don't have any pectin, they clear up nicely just standing in the fermenter without the need for fining agents.
Since fruits and berries are and always will be available at any market (unlike cannabis, which in most places and times is a specialty product), and yeast is in the air all around us, there's really no contest here between growing and processing a plant by yourself vs blending some berries and letting it sit.
georgioz
5hr ago
They Democrats dropped tens of millions for MAGA candidates in 2022 from their own money, while declaring the same candidates as existential threat to democracy.
Spending government money to get some votes of shady characters? Absolutely no problem, especially with so many naive people around.
Say it ain't so Joe!
/images/17291070589396842.webp
More options
Context Copy link