KillingTimeItself

he was in game of thrones? When? Can we blame the downfall on him now? lol.

you never had to respond to me lmao

maybe, but we’re also forgetting that this has literally been a thing since the founding of israel, older than most of entire living families, and most of their grand parents as well.

I’m not really sure something like this could just be “swept under the rug” and forgotten in such a manner, though if they decided to do a one state solution, i’m not going to stop them either lol. I just think a two state solution is the only realistic solution here, given the historical context and pretext of the conflict.

Black and white people mostly get along now, which is true, but it took many, many years. For that to actually be the case, 1964 was the year the civil rights act was passed. But this was also a population that was subjugated and had their rights removed, not one that is militarily backed into a corner. So these are a little bit different.

Plus we also can’t really apply US culture onto the middle east, they just experience the world differently over there.

lol.

i too laugh about torturing people, it’s very funny.

we torture minorities in our prisons for being impoverished

i don’t know anything about this, any sources for reading?

and refuse to prioritize the value of water over the value of oil executive profits.

i’m not sure what these have to do with each other, this is true for most countries. If you’re trying to say that we prioritize profits over secure access to water, i guess that might be true, but one of those is a problem, and another one of those is an economic goal. Those aren’t related. Compared to a lot of countries, the US has really good access to clean potable water.

torturing women for daring to try to be equals is single head on our hydra of exploitative torture.

what does this even mean, this isn’t english. This is a poor bastardization of english.

it was 160 years since emancipation last year. there are people alive still who had people in their life who were owned.

yeah and it’s like 70 years since stalin ruled over the USSR. Cool story bro, should i bring in the nazis also? That was only 80 years ago. Perhaps we should consider maos china, about the same time period 70 or so years ago.

the worst thing about the last ten years that incetivizes people to rupture the system for profit rather than to address the potential for someone to do that because the people holding power would rather rely on precedent than lose a single iota of power

you unironically think abuse of capital is a worse problem than stripping the rights of a countries own people?

brother your name is “fidel cashflow”

i don’t want to hear it from you lmao.

oh that might be the case, though anti education is a big part of the republican party right now, so it might be a multi layered joke lol.

F in chat for ed sheeran, and ugly ugly man, who made not very good music, but was loved by, some people.

history goes a little wacky

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bison_hunting#

Since the start of the conflict it looks like we’ve given ukraine more than $100b in funding. (not all of it is direct) (since 2022)

Israel has received $300b, which is more, but only 3x more, and this is since 1946, the literal founding of israel. Covering spending for the last two fiscal years, it seems to only be about $20b since the october 7th attack, though that’s a pretty rough figure.

in fact if we average these figures, $100b over 2 years is $50b a year, where as if we average the $300b over 78 years it’s only about $3.8b a year. Though in the most recent funding package we have given israel $12b or so in marked funding, which is considerably higher. Still not $50b though.

https://www.csis.org/analysis/past-present-and-future-us-assistance-ukraine-deep-dive-data https://www.cfr.org/article/us-aid-israel-four-charts

maybe, but i think a hitlerism would be a very funny and silly thing to point out, though maybe that in it of itself is problematic lol.

You’ve completely lost the plot, mate. Nobody is saying that a significant percent of the population is being executed.

that’s weird, because the title seems to imply otherwise. I would think it would be worded differently otherwise.

How many people have been executed on Putin’s orders? A hundred? So that’s only like 0.00007% of the Russian population. no big deal then.

probably hundreds. And since we should make this roughly equivalent we should probably consider more broad deaths, picking an extremely broad one like, russian soldiers that have died that number is roughly 300,000 Which if you do the math for, is about 0.02% people killed under the orders of putin specifically.

Putin has also been around for a long time, prior to this he was a KGB member, so he probably has a handful of executions tied to his name there as well. The number is bound to be quite a few.

I wonder why.

that’s a possible influence, but the south is also more republican/conservative than the north, and conservatives tend to like capital punishment a lot more than the democrats. That may in it of itself be due to racism, or subconscious/subtle racism, but that’s a different story. Things are more often than not, very gray. Rather than black and white.

Independent rights granted by the supreme court. AKA the federal government. The 9 robed, tenured individuals are part of the regime. You’re just uncritically accepting the federalist society’s position here.

how else would a state have independent rights??? Illegally??? Yeah no shit it’s imbued upon the state by the federal government, that’s the whole fucking basis of the US government structure. It wasn’t created by god, it was created by the founders.

yes i’m uncritically accepting it, that’s literally how the government works, do you want me to pretend that reality isn’t real? “hmm yes i think the government does not work the way it has been stated to work”

Did you know there was once a moratorium on all executions in the US? But you seem to think of it as a natural law that Missouri has the right to execute whoever they please.

“Although the justices did not rule that the death penalty was unconstitutional, the Furman decision invalidated the death sentences of nearly 700 people. The decision mandated a degree of consistency in the application of the death penalty.” Technically not a moratorium, but in essence was one as states had to rewrite laws to be consistent with this ruling, which they did.

Since you don’t seem to understand how the US government works, will provide an explanation here. The federal government is the ultimate authority on things, if it rules on something, it’s the law that sticks. However this also requires enforcement (as seen with weed) if the federal government doesn’t rule on something in it’s entirety, the remaining discretion is left up to the states who only have to comply with what is explicitly stated in the federal law.

for example if the federal government said that you can’t “execute people without reason” every state that were to execute someone, would have to provide a reason, unless they want to break the law. But if they have a reason, it will comply, whether that reason or not is left up to the courts, and eventually the supreme court if it gets elevated that high, however generally the law is well written enough that this does not regularly happen, as well as states deliberating on it themselves and complying as they understand to be legal.

You’re inferring way too much here. Nobody said or implied that the US federal government was solely responsible for this execution.

i probably am, but in my defense, that title is shit and should’ve been written much better. For example something like “A US state has ruled to execute an innocent man” would’ve been fine. Unfortunately that’s not what it says, and it’s not very specific.

When a headline reads that the Russian regime assassinated a political dissident, do you take the time to point out the federated nature of the Russian government?

Generally not, but generally when russia shoots down a plane with anti air missiles, it’s probably not a federated authority engaging in that. A federated authority may execute someone, but that’s unlikely to make world news. It’s also worth noting that the governmental structure of russia, is different from the US, and is abused quite a bit more. So it’s not a super accurate comparison either.

Would it matter that the evidence points more to an official act of the Dagestan government instead of a direct order from the Kremlin?

if the implication is that the kremlin would’ve done it, when the kremlin didn’t do it, then yes that would matter, because that would be factually inaccurate.

Obviously this isn’t a perfect analogy. But the “US government” (the entity, which is an appropriate description) has given the greenlight for these executions. The supreme court has approved these punishments, and the executive and legislative branches have done nothing to prevent it.

the US government hasn’t to my knowledge given the authority for that specific execution though. The US government has given authority for capital punishment sure. But then we should be talking about that. To my knowledge, the federal government doesn’t oversee every single execution case that ever happens within the US, they might have overseen this specific one, but i don’t know much about it. And even if it did go to the federal supreme court, that would’ve likely been over a specific issue, as with the last objection they tried to make in his favor, arguing that they should’ve forgone the execution because it was done incorrectly, rather than absolving him of his guilt, as they claimed didn’t happen prior to executing him.

Even in this case i still think it would be inaccurate to say that the federal US government had “greenlit” this execution, when it merely ruled on one specific technicality in a many many years long legal battle surrounding the legality of this case. If you wanted to argue that the Missouri government is corrupt and “regime” like i think that would be a lot more accurate in this case.

Here to expand upon why i think this is an inaccurate telling. Let’s say someone asks you for a knife, to open a box or something. You give them a knife, and then you forget that they have it, and by the time you remember, they’ve used that knife to stab someone else. Are you now legally responsible for that stabbing? The answer is no.

Perhaps you might be if they literally told you “give me that knife, i’m going to stab someone with it” but even then it wouldn’t be guaranteed. You would essentially have to be an accomplice to the stabbing in order to be charged.

Yeah, well, my weirdness continues. I’ve got that ADHD time-blindness pretty damn hard, so future events which are inevitable might as well have already occurred in my perspective.

gotta love time travel, i mea-

That’s my prediction as well. Now that the Democrats are the new right-wing, the obvious competition would be a new left-wing party. It probably won’t be one of the existing “left” parties though, as they are almost all thoroughly captured by either foreign interests, state security agencies, or both.

idk that they’re the “new right” like i said i expect them to use moderate language, but then push for more progressive policy. It seems like a really successful strategy. Shit like “we don’t want the government involved in peoples healthcare” implies to me that it will be across the board, not only for abortion, but also shit like gender affirming healthcare. And that we will probably see similar things in schools as well.

Though im pretty sure the “far left” will probably splinter a bit more aggressively over this, i’m not sure how much that will do anything, or even matter, we’ll have to see.

it’s also possible that if/once trumps dies/drops out, that the republican party has to scramble to be normal again, and they either pick up a new normal (probably more moderate, otherwise they probably won’t win) pushing the dems further to the left, though im hoping some of that newer rhetoric stays put, just more progressive in general.

It’ll be interesting to watch.

The machine is only loud when it is actively scanning a patient which it doesn’t seem like was happening in this case. Otherwise it’s relatively silent.

yeah well i’m assuming that if the gun was “sucked into the machine” from the hands of the police officer, that it would have probably been relatively violent. Generally magnets aren’t very polite.

Also the big button is (in my experience at multiple hospitals) always in a different room behind a box that you have to open.

yeah i would have to know the floor layout of the specific place in order to make that judgement tbh. That was just my first insight on that one though. There’s a non zero chance he saw it walking in, police are generally pretty observant, and these buttons aren’t exactly well hidden either to my knowledge so.

How about ending apartheid and making a multiethnic, multi-religious democratic state from the river to the sea? Israelis can become Palestinian, they don’t need to leave.

have you ever seen an israeli or a palestinian?

Neither like eachother. And honestly for good reasons. Good luck with that idea.

TL;DR this is basically like going “why dont the USSR and US just become one state” during the cold war.

fun fact.

The US army gave people ammunition for free if it was used to kill bison for a period of time.

Bison almost went extinct.

Bison were a source of food for the natives.

I love american history!

it’s definitely at least in part intended. She has management now, for sure.

ugly people aren’t allowed to make music anymore?

well fuck me then.

it most certainly drew a lot of energy while the gun was inside of it lol

you mean to tell me someone who isn’t an MRI tech doesn’t know how to operate an MRI?

That’s weird.

MRIs are entirely electrical right? They just use liquid helium for cooling im pretty sure.

Obviously there are a bunch of mechanical parts as well, that goes without saying i think though. Most people wouldn’t be able to tell you the difference between mechanical logic and solid state logic anyway.