They don’t have a plan. This cut the head of the snake strategy never works. It hasn’t worked on stopping organised crime or terrorist groups. When you murder someone they are rarely replaced by someone more moderate.

It’s already expanded. It started as going after “rape and incest” but now it’s all adult games. But a bunch of lgbtq games have already gotten hit. I am beyond furious.

Every single human animal hates your guts

Modern civilisation is slowly falling to barbarians, except none of the barbarians are foreigners.

Being a nice person isn’t bad but “nice guy” is a term for someone who presents themselves as nice and polite (but only to people they’re attracted to) and expects romantic attention in return for being nice. Basically, they think the fact that they put so much effort into being nice they deserve that romantic attention. They’ll often talk about how nice they are.

Of course, anyone who needs to repeatedly tell you they are nice tend not be.

Alcohol is worse for you than weed. But alcohol is far more harmful for you than many people realise. Being not as bad as Alcohol does not make it good or harmless. However, after many years of very overblown propaganda about the threat of weed the pendulum has swung the other way and no many people falsely believe all talk of the damage weed can do to be propaganda. Here’s a good video explaining the topic; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBRaI0ZeAf8&t=661s&ab_channel=Kurzgesagt–InaNutshell

Wait till we get a flat earther in office who denies the existence of gravity, then it’ll be political.

Sadly that not going to work; liquid explosives are a lot less reliable and far more unstable than the stuff they use now. All it takes is a little leak or some crack to set those off. This means manufacturing the mines is significantly more hazardous and transporting them is riskier. You wouldn’tbeable to stockpile them because the explosives would be losing potency from the moment the chemicals were made. Worst of all since they can’t be used to make shaped charges most of the explosive force would go into the ground instead of being directed up and anti tank mines would be impossible.

This isn’t to say self deactivating mines are impossible but every solution I’ve heard is either impractical or could easily be exploited by the enemy.

Mc Kinsey are the guys who invented and popularised the idea of executive bonuses for short term company performance and the idea of layoffs to temporarily make those companies look like they’re doing better. They’ve also consulted for all of the most evil companies in this thread while they were doing their most evil shit. They constantly do the most courpt stuff imaginable. Often their advice creates massive problems which they will then sell their services to the people cleaning up their mess.

They’ve consulted for hostile nations while being paid by the US government to give advice on how to deal with those hostile governments.

Kosovo was UN not NATO. Only NATO engagement was Afghanistan and the Taliban had claimed responsibility for an act of war against a NATO member. Now the actual war was fought entirely in Afghanistan but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a defensive war. It just doesn’t feel like one.

Don’t take this to mean I supported the war in Afghanistan or the many horrible things US troops did while there. (nor do I support the Taliban or their practises and tactics). But NATO is by rule and charter very much a defensive alliance. So much so that if Trump attacks Greenland he will have to face the rest of NATO. Which is something I don’t think he comprehends, it’s obvious that to him the US is the ruler of NATO.

Good God do I fucking hate the lobotomisation of our language to please algorithms that were made to please advertisers. The world is messy and gross if you want real people talking about the real world don’t fucking try to hamfistedly sanitise everything they say.

I am a big proponent of free speech and the merits of free access to information.

Or at least I was. I’ve always known that bad actors with control over your information input can do an awful lot of damage. I used to think free and open access was the best choice. But seeing how a few companies captured the entire social media environment and have swollen to near-total monopolies and then how those same companies have shown themselves to be bad actors with malicious intent I have changed my opinion. Banning them would help slow down the flow of info sewage into the EU and encourage more competing companies to form. We need that since the EU can’t break up American companies. So if new companies were ever to be competitive we need to remove the giants from the pool and commit to breaking up any that get too big.

This is sadly not a surprise. Any carbon capture project that doesn’t involve trees is guaranteed to be a money sink and little else. Any process that pulls carbon out of the air is going to be an energy intensive one. Which means that many carbon capture projects are carbon positive. Often by a significant margin. Most of them are pushed by the oil companies since it’s something they can point to as helping the environment but it increases power usage and their profits. So it’s the option they want everyone to go with. And they’d prefer if we ignore the option that uses self replicating structures with built in solar panels that have spent the last billion years becoming hyper efficient at this exact task.

The thing is they’ve actually made a mistake charging him with terrorism. It is surprisingly narrowly defined so even without a sympathetic jury he might get a not guilty verdict for it and it weakens the whole case against him. But most of all by including it they’ve made all his intentions and politics central issues to the case. All the evidence and his statements about this will have to go into the public record. If he had pleaded guilty that wouldn’t happen nor would there be a chance for jury annulment. Pleading not guilty is simply the smarter option to take.

One of the stories I heard of someone who detransitioned was that they were in collage when they decided to transition. They lived in the dorms and well word very quickly got around. A group was organised including all of their friends and classmates who would take turns standing outside their dormroom door louding praying for them to detransition. The collage staff were no help, they’d helped organise the effort in the first place. After several months of this they gave in and went back into the closet.

I have seen so many talks by and interviews with people who claim to have deconverted from evolution. They all claim pretty similar stuff. Sometimes eeriely similar. Often they talk about being angry. Then they’ll go on to claim that they directed that anger at god, that that was why they bought into the ‘lie’ of evolution and that all atheiests are just like they were, angry at god. It’s funny how closely what they talk about resembles the strawman young earth creationists believe about atheiests and secularists and all those things those people wish where true about us.

I find this very strange because with such large numbers involved on both sides there should , purely statisticly speaking, be a reasonably decent pool of converts each way just down to chance and circumstance. Yet they keep resorting to pushing people who don’t remotely understand the mindset of the groups they claimed they once were part of. Despite that they keep troting them out like they’re a prized bull.

I have seen incel channels full of interviews with random people on the street where they were pushing a narrative of rampent misandry. Interview after interview of women chippily admiting to very hateful stuff about men on camera without an ounce of shame. But of course they wouldn’t have shame they were answering very carefully crafted hypotheticals that they thought were asked in good faith. A few decptive edits to remove their reasonable response’s context and all of a sudden the incels have justification for their anger. The interviews get shared around and around by people who have already decided where they stand but want vindication for their bigotry. ‘Look how common that hate for men is’ they cry, clearly showing how rarely they talk to other people.

I have listened to talks by people who have claimed to have seen the edge of the world or have claimed to have the alien corpses kept at Roswell. I have read statements by someone claiming that they went to a cancer ward, convinced the doctors to inject all the patients with their essential oils which cured everyone of their cancer. I have listened to interviews with anti vaxers claiming to have personally seen wards full of ‘vaccine causalties’ that’s being covered up somehow.

Have some people switched from accepting evolution to young earth creationism? It has to have happened at some point. Are their some misandrists out there? There has to be. Are they anywhere near as prevelant as either of those two groups pretend? Absolutely not. They have a vested interest in pushing the idea that both those things are far more common than they are. Interviews are just ancedotes and no matter how many ancedotes you horde they will never coalesce into evidence.

Do some transgender people regret transitioning? It has to have happened at least once just based off numbers alone Are there a lot? No there aren’t. To an actually surprising degree. But that surprising degree shouldn’t actually be that surprsining; You see before all the irreversible medical procedures there is a bunch of indepth psychological evaluations aimed at filtering out people who would regret it later. We’ve actually gotten pretty good at that. Not that it’s that hard there tends to be some strong and obvious indicators. So I will pose a hypothetical of my own; Even if there was a lot of regretful trangender folk is the answer to ban trans health care altogether or invest in better evaluations and better understanding of it?

Christianity exists. Religions don’t tend to spring up from nowhere. Every myth has its nugget of truth. Was there a preacher back then whose followers later spread around the world? Almost certainly. Where else could Christianity have come from?

Was he the son of god though? Was he capable of all the miracles the bible claims? Is the god he preached even real? There is no evidence that the answer to these three questions is anything but no I’m afraid.

Actually yes. Or well sort of. I believe some tax forms even have boxes for illegal income. This is because there is an odd interaction between two very important laws; you must report all income truthfully for tax purposes and you cannot be compelled to incriminate yourself. Tax law cannot overwrite the 5th amendment. This means they have a choice; either they can prosecute anyone they see as having an illegal income but make it so people writing nothing but “I plead the 5th” on all their tax paperwork is perfectly valid. Or they can choose not to prosecute reported criminal income and retain the ability to go after people who refuse to do their taxes. The only way the tax system can work is if reporting your own illegal income doesn’t legally incriminate you.

The things you write on your taxes cannot be used against you in a court of law unless you are lying in some way. So it is legally safe. Practically perhaps not. Both the police and many of the security agencies love using something known as ‘parallel construction’. It’s where they get some information they shouldn’t have access to or shouldn’t be using and build an investigation that explains how they got that information legitimately so they can use it in court.

Given that the speed of light is the upper limit for changes to propagate through the universe; if you had a four light-year long indestructible rod and you move one end of the rod how long until the other end moves?