In case anyone is unclear this is not how mushrooms work. Even on an insanely high dose you are not going to hallucinate concocted scenarios that aren’t really happening. It makes colors brighter, sounds more clear, and and occasionally makes straight lines seem squiggly or faces seem pixelated. That’s it.
One time I read about a case where the guy thought his neighbor’s house was on fire and broke a window with a fire extinguisher. That makes more sense, maybe he saw an orange light and the mushrooms made it look like it was flickering.
Sir, I have seen my entire living room melt before my eyes, and the size of objects was so distorted I thought I had shrunk below my furniture. I heard voices all night from the outside thinking someone had found me. I also wandered outside and fell in love with the grass and the midnight dew but thought I was in a different world. I’ve also completely lost my vision due to visions and globs/blobs of color and realized it can completely remove you from reality and provide a solid ego death. I was riding rainbows and did not recognize a single object around me.
I don’t think you are giving them enough credit, although I am also skeptical depending on the dosage.
How old were you? I understand younger people have more vivid hallucinations. Thinking back, did you know where you were and what you were actually doing? I’ve had 12 grams, basically a triple dose, out of self loathing, and at no time was I not fully aware of where I was and what was happening around me. The difference was one of intensity of emotional perception and slightly more vivid color and texture effects. Part of the euphoria is from knowing that those fuzzy bright colors you see are not real, you don’t actually believe the fuzzy colors are there. That would be something.
It happened one of my first times around 14 years old, and it has happened a few times in my late 20’s and early 30’s. I’ve had homegrown, foraged, and store bought with similar intense experiences. I think people get hit wildly different if you are taking 12 grams, holy shit! I would never. I certainly have lost all track of what was real and where I was with lower doses than that. I believe you, but have experienced much more intense results myself with less than 12 grams. There was no understanding of reality in different scenarios.
Mushrooms are different, weight does not always have a direct relationship with how potent they are, prolly a better way to word this. Some people are also hypo/hyper sensitive, blood sugar plays a role. A lot of variables, the hardest I’ve ever tripped was on about 1.5 grams, and I usually eat around 3. Ive never been on the level described above, but have had experiences that were absolutely on their way to it. With enough psychedelics, it’s certainly possible.
Idk what shrooms you got but 12g would be quite a light dose, although that depends on bodyweight, tolerance and how much psilocybine your strain contains ofcourse.
But yeah from 30g onwards the lines between real and visuals becomes blurry.
12g dried, pulverized to fine powder, and melted into milk chocolate sous vide.
If anyone ever reading this is thinking about making shroom chocolate, melt it sous vide to retain all the moisture and texture of milk chocolate instead of that dry, crumbly shroom chocolate.
once boiled up half a shopping bag of shrooms and split the tea with one friend.
There were infinite moments where the fabric of space time twisted up into the cosmos believably revealing to me a path into the heavens. I had to control my breathing otherwise the torrent of everyday objects flowing past me would move too quickly for me to get enough traction.
I once had three tiny died shrooms, and a bong hit disconnected my soul from my body and transferring me into an ancient dog sleeping in the sun on a wide open field in the wilderness. the entire thing seemed to go for eons but collapsed back into my living room in and instant when some rang the doorbell.
Then I’ve had shrooms where the trip was extremely profound and emotional but the only visual was the leaves of the trees just looked a bit brighter and more flappy in wind or some swirly clouds of colors bouncing around my hifi speakers.
The hit too. To be so expendable, it was a suicide mission, and the shooters’ families, so expendable, too. They hand you the gun; you can either shoot them, shoot yourself, or go shoot some stranger, and if you do anything other than shoot the stranger, they kill you and your family, too. That’s what’s behind the drug trade. Mexico doesn’t go after the banks that enable the cartels, so this is what they choose.
It’s like in America how the old-monied elites refuse to act on overwhelmingly popular gun reforms, so they have chosen unchecked firearms deaths for the American public.
A faked shooting? Real Secret Service would have him protected on the ground not screen hugging him so he could pump his fist for the cameras with fake blood cap popped on his ear.
As much as I hate to admit this, it wasn’t a fake shooting. The ‘acting’ was way too good to be faked. The mid-word ‘stung in the ear’ confusion slowly followed by the realization of what happened and the clumsy collapse to the ground are just too believable to think it wasn’t real. That said, whether it was a false flag or not is another story.
Won’t matter at this point. Even if it turns out to be faked. It won’t matter. His base is that fucking stupid. The idea has been planted and it doesn’t even have to be true.
This is an unserious proposal. Germany spends about 1.5 percent of its GDP(*) on defence, much of it wasted, and increasing it to even 2 percent has involved painful and extended political wrangling. If the country collectively cannot find the will to tweak its budget to fund a modest increase in defence spending, it is not going to countenance universal conscription.
It’s a serious proposal, but not as a universal conscription. It’s intended to only call everyone in for the health check and use that as a way to get young people interested in the army.
There are different models floating around, the most serious being that everyone (including women) gets called in and you basically choose between civil service and army. The civilian side can ramp up slots rather quickly, the army doesn’t. So the army probably will ramp up over several years.
Also, I wouldn’t call 100 billion € a “modest increase”.
To be honest, conscription aside, I think a gap year of civil service would be a good idea. It gives you a break from school - university - work, you don’t feel like you lost time since everyone has to do it, and you get into a mindset outside of your preplanned route, which might do you good.
I’m going to have to disagree. It’s forced labour, no amount of pretty words changes that. It’s also not a “break” if you have to work, and considering that you’d be unskilled and probably physical labour with no (simple) way for you to quit if faced with abuse, it probably won’t even be under good conditions or compensated fairly.
Except that you need to actually house, feed, clothe and train those draftees and most western militaries no longer have the capacity to do that at scale.
The fact that it is legally easy does not say anything about how difficult it will be organizationally
To be honest, getting a majority to agree that the youth should do what most other generations did seems easier than taking money out of other budgets. Even before Russias attack there had been calls to make every young person do a year or Service for society. The plan was more socially beneficial back then but the sentiment of just ignoring what the younger generation wants isn’t new
This is PATENTLY wrong. It’s 1.49% of GDP, not budget.
Defense budget is 10.9% of the governments budget, it’s the second largest budgeted item after social wellfare and in front of infrastructure (which is crumbling) and debt. To increase it to 2% of gross domestic product means spending an additional amount equal to the entire budget for education and research.
But the point remains: 2% of GDP is the NATO target, getting even to that point for Germany has been like pulling teeth, and a serious implementation of universal conscription would be a much bigger ask.
Hamas is a legitimate resistance group exercising their legitimate, legal right under international law to violently resist unlawful colonization, occupation, land-theft, and genocide. They have every right to exist, they have every right to use violence against settlers who should leave and give back the stolen land.
If you want more moderate types, know that the zionists intentionally crushed them and propped up Hamas to create just this kind of argument and by spouting it you’re carrying water for them. Only the end of the occupation and the formation of a full Palestinian state will result in the breathing room for the creation of moderate groups and opinions.
Isn’t classifying a gamete, but only the female gamete (egg/ovum), and not the male gamete (sperm), of being “children” and has personhood rights, a form of sexist law. I know the Land of freedom is no rookie in taking away freedoms of the marginalized, almost the norm, but now they are taking away male gametes from being recognised as persons. Imagine in one ejaculation in Alabama and having a murder count similar to Stalin or Hitler. The court will show it was premeditated because the person bypassed state restrictions pulling out during copulation, the accused thus commited mass murder. This goes against Genesis 38 and it’s Devine condemnation of coitus interruptus. Even the egg was unfertilized thus another death of a person was committed by the accused pullout game
Your argument holds no weight against a group of people (the current republican supporters) who have repeatedly proven to be misogynistic assholes who gladly vote for a rapist.
Cruelty is the point of their actions, not the side-effect - pointing out to them that their actions are unjust has no effect when that was their goal from the start.
My argument was not meant to hold weight, it was absurdist in its meaning by taking their arguments to the extreme and show its shortcomings. Trying to convince religious zealots that their religious reasonings is wrong is just going to make them double down and commit even more. That is why I make fun of their logic through comedy and hope even though I might not reach them I might put a smile on other open minded people.
I’ll need to do proper research, but to my understanding the embryo is an egg(ovum). I’m not sure at what point an ovum becomes an embryo, but I’m fairly certain it’s shortly after a sperm cell penetrates the outer layer and begins the mitosis.
An embryo results from the fusion of an egg and a sperm (both are called ‘gametes’), and although the embryo is initially more reminiscent of an egg than a sperm, it is not itself an egg (or a sperm). The person I replied to is conflating eggs and embryos.
So two gametes, male sperm and famale ovum, fuse to become a zygote or embryo. I just assumed their ruling meant the gametes because that is an ovum, and an embryo is a zygote
Well they cant be half children. Theyre either kids or not, Id claim them all and if they audit it, then it FORCES the government to involve themselves and set a precedent. If it’s a life, its certainly dependent on the clinic, claim them. Also if they’re truly considered lives, they are inherently entitled to all the rights the US offers living humans. A state tax bill can’t negate that, only dropping the clasification of being a living being can.
Although that is a great drunk food metric for the Midwest. Southwestern border states track burrito inflation, northeastern states track the cost of a slice, and southeastern states drunk food currency is pegged to the Waffle House bill.
In the Al Mawasi “humanitarian zone”, an area smaller than Heathrow which Israel had been advising all Gazans to move to, images showed crowds of people scrambling towards an aid distribution point.
It’s mentioned almost in passing, but we’re talking an area smaller than Heathrow, should house 2M people. It’s a miracle there aren’t more diseases going around already.
I think this is something a lot of people don't realize. If Israel showed any weakness after the Hamas terrorist attacks, it is likely Iran, Lebanon, who else knows who, would attack as well.
Israel was put in an impossible situation and did what it had to do to protect itself.
Lol did I say that? Was Israel ignoring the intelligence about the attack justified? Is murdering children justified? Is stealing people’s homes justified?
I'm talking about Israel's response to being attacked by terrorists. Terrorists who use civilians as human shields and have no respect for anyone's lives. Terrorists who have very clearly stated they will attack Israel again.
Of course Israel is going to defend its people and do everything they can to stop future attacks.
I'm not saying what has happened in the west bank is good. I am saying that it does not justify terrorism.
I’m not saying what has happened in the west bank is good. I am saying that it does not justify terrorism.
Anyone who steals someone’s home is a terrorist. Maybe if they weren’t forcing families out of their homes, they would have had better security at the border fence. It’s almost like they wanted it to happen.
Gaza has been under military occupation by Israel since 1970 (including after the disengagement in 2005; the blockade is very much a form of military occupation). Being attacked by the people you're occupying is the obvious outcome, setting aside the specific details of the attack because I know Hamas did some unspeakable things in Oct 7. If Israel wanted to protect themselves they'd stop their occupation of Palestine and retreat to 1967 borders.
“We make peace with enemies,” Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin reassured a concerned citizen shortly after the September 13, 1993 conclusion of the Israel-PLO Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (DOP, or Oslo I). “I would like to remind you that the [March 1979] peace treaty with Egypt had many opponents, and this peace has held for 15 years now.”[1] True enough. But peace can only be made with enemies who have been either comprehensively routed (e.g., post-World War II Germany and Japan) or disillusioned with the use of violence—not with those who remain wedded to conflict and war. And while Egyptian president Anwar Sadat was a “reformed enemy” eager to extricate his country from its futile conflict with Israel, Yasser Arafat and the PLO leadership viewed the Oslo process not as a springboard to peace but as a “Trojan Horse” (in the words of prominent PLO official Faisal Husseini) designed to promote the organization’s strategic goal of “Palestine from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea”—that is, a Palestine in place of Israel.
Arafat admitted as much five days before signing the accords when he told an Israeli journalist, “In the future, Israel and Palestine will be one united state in which Israelis and Palestinians will live together”[3]—that is, Israel would cease to exist. And even as he shook Rabin’s hand on the White House lawn, the PLO chairman was assuring the Palestinians in a pre-recorded, Arabic-language message that the agreement was merely an implementation of the organization’s “phased strategy” of June 1974. This stipulated that the Palestinians would seize whatever territory Israel surrendered to them, then use it as a springboard for further territorial gains until achieving the “complete liberation of Palestine.”
Almost every Palestinian around wants a one-state solution. That's bad because? A one-state solution is better than a two-state solution in every way possible, except in securing Israel's Jewish majority state where they can practice apartheid.
It’s bad because if your goal is peace, it’s a non-starter. No moral judgement about either side, that’s just how it is. Maybe if we get peace through a two-state solution, 100 years from now there might be a chance for unification, but right now the wounds are too deep.
I mean Palestinians (including Hamas, believe it or not) are currently working towards (or would like to, but the other side is a genocidal state that has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo) a two-state solution, but the fact that one state encompassing all of Palestine is no secret. The article you linked uses that as a proof that the Oslo process was doomed from the start. That's unadulterated bullshit. The Oslo peace process was the closest the conflict ever came to ending, until a Zionist terrorist assassinated Rabin. There's just no way that can be blamed on the Palestinian side.
I agree, but the simple fact is Arafat and other Palestinian leaders were telling the people they were negotiating with one thing, and their own people another thing. The simple fact is neither side has ever wanted anything but “from the river to the sea”. The Oslo process wasn’t necessarily doomed, and it was the closest to peace we’ve been, but it would have been (if it had succeeded) far from the end of the peace process.
Iran or Israel’s plan? Iran is well known for enlisting terrorists to do their dirty work for them, and Israel is probably eyeing up some border territory they can grab.
Apparently the sentiment among settlers is that the “natural borders of the Jewish Homeland” extend from the Nile to the Euphrates.
Iran and Hamas just wanted to stop Saudi Arabia from establishing diplomatic ties with Israel, further marginalizing Iran in the region. They succeeded there, and the majority of the retribution fell on the citizens of Gaza.
Iran got everything they wanted and came out clean.
telegraph.co.uk
Top