Someone throwing a paper cup out a window is only littering once. I’ll still football spike that cup back at them through their window. He doesn’t have to die in the ocean, he can die elsewhere if he wants to so bad, without polluting the ocean.
I live in Oklahoma, apparently better than Germany. Out-of-state corporations buy off our politicians. This means they get insane tax cuts among other sketchier tax schemes. Having low pay employees is one of our main draws for new businesses. Unemployment here is very low, but there isn’t much of a reason to stay in state when you are looking for a job. Our education system is getting worse and worse, good teachers leave the state every year and the leaders are doing jack shit to retain them.
"I think he was getting involved in the match for a long time, though. I don’t mind it, I love when fans are loud, I love when fans are emotional"
sounds like the guy had been cheering loudly in support of Zverev the whole match, and this was after a couple of hours and the guy legitimately just got really carried away shouting some stupid shit.. doesn't sound like the fan was seriously supporting Hitler or anything.. apparently just a loud moron who needed some attention..
I don’t think that context excuses nearly as much as you think. At no point in my life have I been drunk or giddy enough to shout God Save the Queen or recite some confederate anthem. And I’ve been damn drunk before.
the guy legitimately just got really carried away shouting some stupid shit… doesn’t sound like the fan was seriously supporting Hitler or anything… apparently just a loud moron who needed some attention…
I might be a reactionary moron, but at least I’ve never had to explain the nuance between excusing a nazi and merely attempting to explain why being a nazi isn’t so bad. Do go on, though, because it’s still not clear how you weren’t excusing the nazi chants.
i'm saying quite explicitly that i don't think he's a Nazi, based on the evidence.. so i'm not defending Nazis.. this is how you're demonstrating your reactionism.. you assume he's a Nazi, and therefore my language is not harsh enough for you.. it's a pain in the ass trying to explain this to you through your reactionary tendency.. perhaps you're unable to see things rationally for some reason..
Based on the evidence that he shouted Nazi slogans, and he was drunk, you’re saying you don’t think it’s fair to say he was drunk and shouting Nazi slogans, but you’re not defending the drunk guy shouting of Nazi slogans? And your defense is that I’m overreacting to the Nazi slogans because I said it’s not OK to shout Nazi slogans? So I’m the irrational one in this conversation?
Were you perchance bitten by a radioactive projector?
Idk. I don’t think this particular phrase would even enter my mind as something to chant, and I am German. That’s not the first time he chanted that, I’m sure. It is taboo for sure, but it’s not in the cultural consciousness a lot, there’s more “popular” nazi slogans. You’d either have to search your brain for something specifically Hitler related or be very familiar with the old anthem (aka singing it a lot aka being a neonazi).
I do not agree that this is the “most” Hitler thing though. There are so much more famous things, hut they wouldn’t fit the situation though.
It was probably an American fan(it is the US Open) who thinks that’s still the German national anthem… Still good on the player for shutting that shit down, it’s a misunderstanding that doesn’t need to be repeated.
Idk, maybe. I listened to the audio, and to me, it did sound like someone who speaks German well. The pronounciations and emphasis sounded very natural. And fans do travel for events like these. Of course it could be an American, but somehow I still doubt it. Is this phrase known in the US?
Yeah, but would you (I assume american) even know enough words to so clearly repeat the opening words? Idk. It’s just not something you’d come across often even in Germany outside of history class, german class, or neonazi circles. I assume even less so for non Germany. So that this would be so top of mind for someone to just slip out is just such a strange and unlikely thought to me.
Idk. The phrase is bad, but it wouldn’t come up in my top 10 of nazi phrases, so for it to just slip out, I have to to assume that person frequently uses nazi phrases.
RICO prosecution requires multiple acts wherein members set up an "illegal coordinated scheme or operation (a "racket") to repeatedly or consistently collect a profit" through coercion, fraud or extortion.
How in the hell is this going to apply to loosely organized voluntary protesters who are unarmed in the face of heavily armed police?
They were organized enough to form a 503c charity and then funnel money in and out of it, track expenses and receipts, and perform reimbursements for supplies for conducting what amounts to traditional terrorism. They also established both on-grid and off-grid communication networks to organize and strategize. They also created and internally published their own educational materials to indoctrinate new recruits to the inner core of the cause.
You and I have very different definitions for “loosely”.
You and I have very different definitions for “illegal coordinated scheme,” " repeatedly or consistently collect a profit through coercion, fraud or extortion," and also “conducting what amounts to traditional terrorism”
a 503c charity and then funnel money in and out of it, track expenses and receipts, and perform reimbursements for supplies
You mean a 501c3 charity. Those are all required activities for a 501c3. That is not an criminal enterprise.
conducting what amounts to traditional terrorism
Do you actually support our democratic government powers being corrupted into authoritarianism sprinkled with fascism?
They also created and internally published their own educational materials to indoctrinate new recruits to the inner core of the cause.
That’s what all organizations do, be they religious, charitable, or political.
The entire indictment reads like propaganda piece, carefully crafted as to focus on political ‘anarchist militant’ rhetoric like this is the late 1960s and 70s, to create a false narrative bubble so that it includes any and all of the community organizers involved.
This is an egregious abuse of power through the use of RICO, and it’s not the first time GA has employed it against activist types.
They created booby traps on public property and took at least one completely innocent nonrealted person hostage at gunpoint. Get the fiuck out of here with “egregious abuse of power”. Right to protest doesn’t give you a blank check to maim other people or hold them at gunpoint and it doesn’t threaten democracy to indict them for that.
The RICO case is literally targetting everyone it can and certainly will affect everyone willing to protest. Its called the chilling effect and its a common strategy of authoritarians in government. It’s not actually prosecuting the explicitly henious criminal activity you are trying to reference to justify your support of an obvious egregious abuse of power.
Your position is sophmoric cognitive dissonance, you are demanding to shrink the context of the discussion to justify your pitchfork waving.
RICO is intended to prosecute wealthy and powerful puppeteers who hide behind their disposable pawns to do their dirty work. If this case was only about lawful protest, you have a reasonable argument, but it wasn’t, and you don’t. The fact that they broke laws and harmed innocent bystanders and took action that could have harmed more is OK for you because they did it in the name of a cause you happen to support. Call me whatever you want, you aren’t going to be able to justify the coordinated misdeeds when it infringes on the rights of the innocent.
RICO is intended to prosecute any group of individuals attempting to profit from running a criminal enterprise. The charged individuals as a group having a 501c3 with verbose open records and a verbose paper trail of spending in the first place may even been seen as a possible mitigating factor against finding a RICO conspiracy.
Yes, the case is not about lawful protest, it’s about criminality, and in that context it’s being used to prosecute more than just criminality as it sweeps in leaders among the protestors not involved in criminality. It amounts to suppression of protestors and is a dangerous precedent to support from any level of government prosecution. This RICO case ends up being used in a way to prevent people from exercising First Amendment rights, a public protest is a form of petitioning the Government for a redress of grievances. What specific evidence has put all of these people into a category of criminality that isn’t just a sweeping catch all attempt using ‘anarchist’ activity (which is protected speech activity until acts occur, acts that are criminal activities done for protest are individually prosecuted)?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Who would or is actually profiting from the alleged criminal activity? That alone makes the RICO charges dubious.
You have no basis in support of prosecution beyond conjecture, and/or you are intentionally ignoring any larger context that doesn’t support your pitchfork desire for prosecution. There is nothing you have put forth that has any forethought or consideration of anything but the prosecutorial indictment claims alone.
I called out your position as bullshit, I didn’t call you an idiot asshole as a person. Learn to recognize the difference, and do better.
Your entire argument hinges on whether the organization had a role to play in the illegal activities vs whether the illegal activities were done by individuals in the organization. If someone in my company does something illegal, there should not be a RICO case against me unless I conspired with them to specifically do that illegal thing.
Your entire argument hinges on whether the organization had a role to play
Well, let’s be real here. It’s the prosecution’s argument. And they obviously believe the organization played a role or they wouldn’t have named those individuals in the indictment.
After reading through it, it does appear that the prosecution believes that senior individuals inside the organization were promoting the illegal behavior without actually getting their hands dirty.
Then the war is against those who profit most from inflicting climate change.
As with pretty much any human caused problem in human history, you need only follow the money.
That’s the core problem, the perpetrators of climate change have become effectively untouchable, leaving us nibbling around the edges so as not to inconvenience our owners.
No amount of peasants sorting recycling or putting up private solar panels will even begin to address this cataclysm. The enemies are big oil, big manufacturing, and big livestock. Unless we magically become willing to slap the profiteers/significant shareholders of those industries back down to Earth, sharply reduce them without concern for their continued profits as we should, and change our lifestyles to adapt to less ridiculous levels of consumption, we’re all fucked.
We are all just fucked. The proven unsustainable, unending Capitalistic growth/metastasis needs to stop for the sake of civilization, and our civilization has proven we would literally rather burn then reign our capitalists in and say “no” to their insatiable, sociopathic greed. After all, they are our glorious, benevolent job creators.
How do we convince millions of true believer capitalism worshipping peasants who’ve been propagandized since birth to labor and consume as their sacred duty that what our species needs to do is abandon the idea of growing the footprint and consumption of our species without end and seek homeostasis/equilibrium with this world instead?
His lawyers are almost undoubtedly requiring retainer fees to cover everything. There’s no way they’d be stupid enough to work on contingency or expect to collect payment after the fact. He’s probably having to write them new checks for every single week that they continue working on his case, and I can guarantee that they’re getting the bank to verify those checks before they actually accept them.
Was gonna say, I’ve never had an issue booking a hotel in NYC as long as I plan ahead, and rates are generally reasonable as long as you, again, plan ahead. Obviously you’re going to pay more at the height of tourist season, weekends, whenever events are happening, etc. It’s been this way for pretty much forever. But if you book your stay a few months out, you tend to get better deals.
I live in a ski town that has a massive Airbnb problem, and the city is finally green lighting the building of more hotels. It’s everywhere. And while there is an expectation that holiday weekends and much of the winter is busy, it doesn’t help having morons going apeshit until 3am on a Tuesday when I have work the next day and our sheriffs can be pretty useless.
Where I’m at, cabin rentals were a thing long before Airbnb. People had their vacation cabins, and they’d rent them out through a local agency. It was fine for decades, and most people used them to supplement their vacation property. It wasn’t until Airbnb that people were actively scooping up as many properties as possible to rent them out exclusively and completely thrash the local housing market. And I know we’re not alone in this, ski/tourist towns all over the world are having this problem.
Looks like Florida chose to be the wicked son for Passover.
You should also “blunt his teeth” (speak harshly to him13) and say to him:
“It is because of this that I would fulfill His commandments, such as this Passover offering, matzah and maror14that G‑d acted for me when I left Egypt (Exodus 13:8)—for me, but not for him. If he [the wicked child] had been there, he would not have been redeemed.”
I thought it was mostly proven myth that any slaves or Israelites were building shit in Egypt. Also there’s zero record of any sort of Exodus or anything to corroborate the story of Moses
Yes, it might be a book of bullshit, but it’s a bullshit book we read every year and sing songs from about how we were foreigners and slaves and should be nice to foreigners and slaves. The fact that there’s even a part about “what if I question how trial and tribulation I’ve never known affects me?” And you’re supposed to essentially say, “bitch! God wouldn’t have saved you cuz you’re too much of a bitch!”
Eta: hell, there’s even a part where we’re like, “God killed the Egyptian oppressors, let’s dance and sing!” And then God, who could only speak to Moses, spoke to everyone all like, “look you ungrateful fucks! I may have made the Egyptians with my left hand while getting over a cold, but they’re my creations nonetheless! Quit celebrating and pour one out for your fallen homies.” Then we get rid of 10 drops of wine to resemble 10 drops of blood for the 10 plagues and how horrible it was that God made the Pharoh say no and then punished all the poor people for it.
On a yearly basis, multiple times per year, our parents dress us up and misinterpret the importance of all these holidays that are supposed to teach us empathy, apology, forgiveness, and patience. But fuck all that, right? Being a Jew is about… Checks notes …Banning books about actual slavery?
Usually you think of the extermination aspect, but yes there was some. But my point was that responding to me saying another book containing slavery with a historical event was kind of unusual. There’s been books written on it for sure by it’s mostly unrelated.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.