There was the cybertruck technical some wealthy Russian was posting about. Last I heard Tesla remotely disabled it.

The only way this makes sense to me is that Musk has to play nice with the last two, while the rest are happy to play ball with him as long as stocks keep inflating, regardless of how much of a rage baby he acts. If they are not playing ball, he can just throw a fit on X until he gets his way. No chance of that working so well with the last two. So he has to show fealty. Musk has much more leverage to get what he wants from the west. Outside of the west he actually has to make deals.

air pistols at dawn

under pressure

trigger point

don’t pull, squeeze

So Joe Biden is Pro-Trump is what you are saying?

DotB

DotP

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_diplomacy_of_Israel

there are significant resources deployed to shape Israel’s image favorably, especially amongst the US public

Ukrainian militias have been shelling Donbas for about 8 years before 2022.

I think the correct answer is sharks.

Damn this inflation!

Muslim Countries About China/Uyghurs:

Muslim Countries About Israel/Palestinians:

USA About China/Uyghurs:

USA About Israel/Palestinians:

Where did this come from?

the mask of civility is the thin veneer that liberals use to hide their agenda

it’s related to the difference between materialist and idealist perspectives

if you claim to uphold lofty ideals, then you can just claim the material failure to live up to those ideals is an oversight, mistake, accident, victim-blame etc

this is also why plausible deniability is a critical aspect of many operations, it was those few bad people that caused the bad things, not the institutional structure that is dedicated to lofty ideals

Volunteered in 1943 too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_North_Korea

During the campaign, conventional weapons such as explosives, incendiary bombs, and napalm destroyed nearly all of the country’s cities and towns, including an estimated 85% of its buildings.

A total of 635,000 tons of bombs, including 32,557 tons of napalm, were dropped on Korea. By comparison, the U.S. dropped 1.6 million tons in the European theater and 500,000 tons in the Pacific theater during all of World War II (including 160,000 on Japan). North Korea ranks alongside Cambodia (500,000 tons), Laos (2 million tons), and South Vietnam (4 million tons) as among the most heavily-bombed countries in history.

In an interview with U.S. Air Force historians in 1988, USAF General Curtis LeMay, who was also head of the U.S. Strategic Air Command, commented on efforts to win the war as a whole, including the strategic bombing campaign, saying “Right at the start of the war, unofficially, I slipped a message in “under the carpet” in the Pentagon that we ought to turn SAC lose with some incendiaries on some North Korean towns. The answer came back, under the carpet again, that there would be too many civilian casualties; we couldn’t do anything like that. We went over there and fought the war and eventually burned down every town in North Korea anyway, some way or another, and some in South Korea, too…Over a period of three years or so we killed off, what, 20 percent of the population of Korea, as direct casualties of war or from starvation and exposure? Over a period of three years, this seemed to be acceptable to everybody, but to kill a few people at the start right away, no, we can’t seem to stomach that.”

Sahr-Conway Lanz, who holds a Ph.D. in the history of American foreign relations, has written extensively about the legacy and impact on American discourse on the international norm of noncombatant immunity. He states:

“During the war, American military and civilian officials stretched the term “military target” to include virtually all human-made structures, capitalizing on the vague distinction between the military and civilian segments of an enemy society. They came to apply the logic of total war to the destruction of the civil infrastructure in North Korea. Because almost any building could serve a military purpose, even if a minor one, nearly the entire physical infrastructure behind enemy lines was deemed a military target and open to attack. This expansive definition, along with the optimism about sparing civilians that is reinforced, worked to obscure in American awareness the suffering of Korean civilians in which U.S. firebombing was contributing.”

The song was inspired by Korean war veteran that John McCrea met in a bar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Rgsihd6WM

my brain at 3am: 6 hours of sleep is plenty, I’m finely exhausted enough to stop

my brain at 9 am after drinking coffee:

my brain at noon: STOP BOTHERING ME ASSHOLE!

Oopsies!

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthony-rota-apologizes-honoring-man-who-fought-for-nazis-canada-yaroslav-hunka/

The speaker of Canada’s House of Commons apologized Sunday for recognizing a man who fought for a Nazi military unit during World War II.

Just after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy delivered an address in the House of Commons on Friday, Canadian lawmakers gave 98-year-old Yaroslav Hunka a standing ovation when Speaker Anthony Rota drew attention to him. Rota introduced Hunka as a war hero who fought for the First Ukrainian Division.

Rota noted in his introduction that Hunka had fought in World War II “against the Russians.”

“In my remarks following the address of the President of Ukraine, I recognized an individual in the gallery. I have subsequently become aware of more information which causes me to regret my decision to do so,” Rota said in a statement.

Doing their best to play dumb, but it’s plain to see they knew what “against the Russians in WW2” means.

HTML is like the AK47 of web design. It does the job and respects the user.

Marxists can stop enshittification. Simple HTML websites embody the proletarian spirit.

Ask yourself a simple question. What happens to someone that doesn’t have a job in our society?

The concept of having ‘free speech zones’ where political speech is allowed is … very inherently political though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech_zone

Civil liberties advocates argue that free speech zones are used as a form of censorship and public relations management to conceal the existence of popular opposition from the mass public and elected officials.[24] There is much controversy surrounding the creation of these areas – the mere existence of such zones is offensive to some people, who maintain that the First Amendment to the United States Constitution makes the entire country an unrestricted free speech zone.[24] The Department of Homeland Security “has even gone so far as to tell local police departments to regard critics of the War on Terrorism as potential terrorists themselves.”