Discord ID: 331975532080005121
9,796 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Page 1/98 | Next
"The Feed" appears to be some kind of Vice clone hosted by Australia's SBS network.
We're talking about it, so wacky shit like this gets eyeballs.
Adblocking solutions on mobile devices are limited, and viewership from mobile devices is often the majority these days (though it varies considerably from site to site)
@wacka That ISIS pocket near the Iraq border contains a bridge over the Euphrates. Important since the one in Deir ez-Zor has been destroyed.
So it's not so much the SAA and SDF teaming up to kill ISIS so much as them both trying to push out remnants to capture the bridge.
Quite possible. SAA failed to make any headway after they crossed near there, and their pontoon bridge was destroyed. They might be preparing to gas the SDF (since their conventional advance failed), and then claim the SDF gassed themselves as a false flag.
There are so many layers of deception in anything the Russians say or do that even they have a hard time parsing it.
Why? SAA has basically recaptured every other part of the country. To make any further advances they either have to clash with SDF or Turks.
That little pocket that both sides are spit-roasting is their last piece of inhabited territory.
Yes. And there are Kurds on that side of the border.
Too far out to predict anything in such a mixed up chaotic situation.
I don't think laws are going to stop anyone here.
There's a possible flash point between the Russians and the Turks in that heavy bombardment of Al Lataminah area is rather close to a new Turk FOB near Morek, astride the main road north. Assuming the SAA takes the Al Lataminah, they'll have to deal with Turks next - either diplomatically or militarily.
There are virtually no western journalists in the entire country.
First of all it's a meat grinder for anyone near areas of active fighting. Second of all no one wants to let randos cross the border. Getting in is extremely difficult as is not dying.
Which is a shame as it means when stuff like the recent missile strike happens no one has any hope of getting the truth of the matter. You just have to decide which narrative you like best.
These sorts of actions aren't about convincing. They're about controlling.
Reading "People's History" by Kurt Schlichter right now, and in it the People's Republic actually has social privilege levels on their ID cards. A number from 1-10 quantifying exactly how high you are on the oppression totem pole. Takes into account one's own 'intersectionality', as well as that of one's ancestors. Not exactly highbrow literature, but it's fun in a pulpy kind of way.
Such a thing wouldn't actually come to pass though, as such an objective way of looking at the oppression olympics goes against the post-modernist world-view.
Can someone post the actual Vice link so I can put it on archive.is? I don't want to give Vice a click.
The Manbij base is probably there to restrain the Turks more than anything else. Left to themselves the Turks would probably genocide the Kurds.
Not killing Erdogan was a huge mistake. The CIA had ONE JOB and they couldn't do it.
@Arch-Fiend "i think in a war between extreme left and extreme right, right wins and we all lose" - this is exactly what Noam Chomsky says.
Today's extreme left won't listen to Chomsky though, because he isn't a post-modernist.
their website mentions their copyright policy (i.e. that copyright will not and cannot be enforced), but the same goes for illegal material. these people risk prosecution under FOSTA
like tor this network will be heavily used by pedophiles
There's probably only a minority of homeless people who can actually be permanently helped out of their homelessness. That's where resources ought to be focused. It's like triage: help who you can actually help and don't waste resources helping those who are beyond help.
For those who are beyond helping, all that can be done is to minimize the harm they can do to society.
There are always going to be people who are too mentally ill, too extreme in personality, or too far gone to drug addiction to become functioning members of society.
All the alleged meaning of this video is lost on me.
Tim, at some point you're going to have to accept that you're considered an undesirable by Youtube and that they've blacklisted you. This isn't just a series of mistakes on their part. They're trying to drive you away. It's intentional. Mere incompetents wouldn't be so consistent in their actions and in their victims.
I remember back when this game was in development I actually wanted to play it. Then it attracted the most autistic, degenerate fanbase in history.
Undertards make sonic fans seem well adjusted.
Vice has to chase clicks like everybody else. Internet advertising is not as profitable as it once was, and companies with large overhead either have to optimize to survive. It's just unfortunate for everyone that the optimal state of the internet is apparently puerile clickbait, typically of a vulgar sexual or race-bait nature, generated as cheaply as possible by amoral corporations.
I suppose the next step will be AI generated articles indistinguishable from those written by actual SJWs. Cheaper to have a bot write your clickbait than pay some otherkin in San Fran.
I wonder if Tim has the necessary body armor & plates.
It would be pretty horrible if the first general intelligence AI was created to control access to content.
They're not going to stop. The narrative will not change.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=antifa+attacks plenty of examples on YT
There's so many incidents it doesn't seem like getting a count is even possible.
Another place to check for videos would be liveleak. They might have stuff that Youtube would censor.
So there's a chemical means of political control?
Before this decade is out we will see mainstream publications advocating voluntary castration.
Not merely vasectomy, but complete removal of the testes.
The American system was designed to be conservative in nature, meaning resistant to rapid, radical change. As opposed to parliamentary systems in which a majority government effectively has total and unassailable power.
There are benefits and drawbacks to such a system.
The benefit is that it's less amenable to the whims of the mob. The drawback is that it's less adaptive to rapidly changing conditions.
The original form of the American system was even more conservative. Senators were appointed and recalled by state legislature, and state legislatures don't tend to change in make-up very often.
Federalism was supposed to alleviate that. Unfortunately Federalism has lost most of its strength post-Reconstruction.
The original idea was that individual states would handle most of their own affairs, and only the common defense, borders, etc and the trade between states would be subject to federal law.
Well, there was a lot of preemptive action taken by the South. They perceived eventual legal loss of their ability to own slaves, and so acted extra-legally before such legal action could be taken.
Slavery wasn't banned until after the war was well underway.
And under the system of federal government that existed at the time, it's quite possible that had the South stayed in the union that they would've held onto their slaves for decades more.
What does what Lando chooses to do with his cock have to do with STAR WARS
Is it important to the Star part or the Wars part?
Most of the 100 other things are counter-productive to left-wingers.
There's not much difference between the two these days.
Being completely against immigration of any sort is an extremist position. The vast majority of the electorate supports regulated immigration, because it's easily supported by logic and data as being a net benefit to society. The regulation typically meaning some sort of numerical cap and also a requirement of being able to economically contribute to a modern economy.
The people who are against any sort of immigration are very small in number.
Uncontrolled immigration is conflated with regulated immigration in almost every instance where the topic is broached however. Other than on Fox news perhaps (and often even then) every television personality or columnist speaking about immigration refuses to distinguish between people actually going through the legal process (which the overwhelming majority of voters support), and people just wandering across the border.
Same problem with war refugees and economic migrants.
There's a pretty big difference between "if I stay in my country ISIS will kill me" and "my job is shit so I'm going to Germany for free stuff"
I understand that there will always be a segment of the population that is blinded to reality by their open, compassionate nature. Some people have personalities dominated by and driven by empathy and that's not necessarily a bad thing. So I'm not concerned so much about the pathological altruists. I'm more concerned about those who are try to profit from uncontrolled immigration, both in terms of money and in terms of power.
In the US illegals are basically the new slaves.
I'd say for the majority of people who support uncontrolled immigration it's simply due to the emotions they experience (regardless of what label you use for those emotions).
Those who support uncontrolled immigration for access to the new slaves are a bigger concern to me.
And above the new slave owner class would be the Soros types who see immigration waves as power. Engineering crises through population change in order to expand their power.
If I were an amoral billionaire who wanted to expand my power in the US I'd try my damnedest to collapse nations in South America while simultaneously organizing migrant caravans north and pro-immigration protests in the US.
Like Warren Buffett lobbying Obama to block oil pipelines. He owns all the oil tanker rolling stock.
It's vastly more expensive and more dangerous to move oil by rail, and Warren Buffett doesn't need the money, but he is exercising power by blocking pipelines.
Or worse, you could believe you are helping them by killing them.
Stalin honestly believed what he was doing was best.
I think what we're trying to say is that even extremely powerful and intelligent people can act pathologically.
Soros himself has said that he has a "Savior Complex"
People are not machines. We are emotional beings made of meat and chemicals.
We don't perform like clockwork analytical engines.
We have so many things wrong with our brains that we have a huge list of specific names for them.
Tons of intentional distortion and conflation of information to demoralize you and exert control over you.
Confuse you with reams of misinformation until you don't know what's what and can't possibly hope to sort through it all.
Like how "gun deaths" include suicides, but the figures are used to push the notion of constant massacres.
When massacres are incredibly rare, and the majority of gun deaths come from a) suicides, b) inner city gang violence, and c) accidents.
Perhaps I should be less politically correct and restate it as black-on-black violence.
What I'm trying to say though is that massacres are a very rare phenomenon. And those who are pushing the idea that they are common will often be the same people who turn around and say that you're more likely to be killed by a sex toy than a terrorist attack.
9,796 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Page 1/98 | Next