It’s textbook genocide. They’ve seen they can get away with anything under the guise of war, so why not just solve all their issues and make sure no one’s alive to return to their homes?
The origin of that (specifically “Kill Them All and Let God Sort It Out”) is way older than that, back all the way to the 13th century and the Cruzades.
I vaguelly remembered it being from a source older than that so I went and looked it up.
There’s no guise. This is the way war has been prosecuted for millennia. The Geneva Convention, UNHRC, etc. are blips. War is genocide and always has been. Only in the late modern to post-modern era has war been something other than the complete annihilation of your enemies and their culture, including all the infanticide and rape that implies. If you’re, for instance, the US prosecuting a war for nebulous geopolitical reasons, then you can slap up a veneer of rules and conduct. If it’s a war of territorial expansion, on the other hand, you’d better be prepared to do what it takes to stamp out any trace of the people who originally lived there, or at least leave those who remain so broken and disempowered that they’ll never pose a threat.
Expect more like Ukraine & Palestine as the US’s grip on hegemony slips, and as we continue to slowly forget the lessons of the World Wars.
Not quite true. While there were many wars of cultural genocide, (culture is a great control tool), wars of physical genocide were largely reserved for religious wars and punishment wars. Not gonna pay that tithe or surrender the second you see us? Congratulations, you’re an example. Espouse a different religious truth? You’re a threat that must be made an example.
For the most part they understood the value of human capital and didn’t want to destroy it if they didn’t have to.
I think Ukraine has reestablished American hegemony. It’s showcased how powerful it is to have American support, and galvanized NATO once more.
I honestly don’t think you can tie Palestine into this. This conflict has never been indicative of any global influence. This is where global influence does nothing in the face of intense hatred.
This is not true. There are hundreds of cultures around today who were conquered and just left to live until their conquerors eventually moved out. The Jews themselves have literally been conquered a dozen times.
I have one of Mahmoud Darwish’s books right here, goes into pretty significant detail about Israel’s attempts to stamp out Palestinian culture in the earliest years:
I admit, I’ve been skeptical of this for a while because I couldn’t think of a reason why they’d want to do this.
And I realized today. There doesn’t have to be some grand reason. Killing them all ensures Hamas is killed too. They’ll destroy Palestine because it’s easier and safer for them to indiscriminately bomb the place. That’s reason enough. :/
The FAA sent alerts to airlines after the Horizon Air incident saying “a validated jump seat passenger attempted to disable aircraft engines while at cruise altitude by deploying the engine fire suppressions system.”
This is what I was looking for. From the title it seems like he just tried to throttle down but he was looking to incapacitate the engines. If he was successful it would have meant the airplane would have been in a glide without power. It seems likely as a pilot he’d know when to do this in a flight too to remove good chances of a safe landing. Truly terrifying!
I’m not so sure about that. The only thing more important that security to airline companies is “money”. Having to charter flights or wait for availability of their own flights to move staff around would be CRAZY expensive. I have full faith that airlines will look the other way on this one to avoid that cost to the companies.
They already do that. However, if all the passenger seats are full (which isn’t uncommon) there is usually at least 1 but sometimes multiple jump seats on aircraft that allow airlines to move around pilots and other crew members to different airports. Airlines usually let other airlines fly their competitors staff because they also reciprocate when they need it.
Restricting the crew seats to just unsold passenger seats will likely have a huge impact to operations and ALL the different airlines’ bottom lines.
They could just not sell every single seat in the main cabin.
I’ll go back to my first point: The only thing more important that security to airline companies is “money”.
Your suggestion is that the airlines lose money on sale of seats because they’re keeping some seats empty on every flight on the off chance the airline (or one of their competitor airlines) needs to get a pilot or flight crew member to another airport. That would lose the airlines money. They wont’ do that.
I doubt it. Aviation would grind to a halt is pilots and flight attendants can’t commute in jump seats. Besides, this guy was a captain. He could have done the same thing as a pilot, much like the Germanwings flight several years ago.
I’d think that in the majority of emergency situations, having an extra person who knows what’s going on in the cockpit would be more of a benefit than a risk. Especially given that one of the actual fight crew could decide to go all murder suicide on their flight, and unless the odds of any pilot doing this is greater than 50%, the more people in the cockpit, the more people to fight the bad ones off and take control of the plane and monitor things that would need monitoring in the event that someone successfully disables the engines.
Majority, probably not. Most emergency checklists are going to assume the cockpit crew is the normal count and throwing an extra person is is going to cause more harm than good. The only exception I can think of is UA Flight 232 which while tragic probably would have been worse without someone else in the cockpit.
Yeah, I should have said, “the cases when the extra person is a benefit are probably more common than the cases where the extra person attempts to murder the crew and/or crash the plane”.
A good manager is like the coxswain of a row boat. Their job isn’t to provide more power, or tell the rowers how to row. Their job is to keep all the rowers synchronized, and pulling in the same direction.
A good manager does a similar thing. They keep the team both aligned with each other, and pointed in the required business direction. There are a LOT of bad managers out there, however.
Depending on the business situation, that would be a complete disaster. You don’t want 10 people working on a 5 man job, when 2 more jobs are both languishing, and time critical. A good manager can make the calls about which work can wait, and which needs to take priority, and how to balance things. They can also work as primary points of contact between different teams and companies. This keeps information flow clear and stops people being left out of the loop.
While all of these can be done without a manager, the efficiency plummets as the number of people grow. By the time you’re dealing with large, inter-company politics, a manager is critical to take load off the workers. I don’t want to spend 80% of my time keeping people informed, when I can spend 2% and get on with my actual job.
Lmao this is not how human beings function. The smarter and more skilled your employees are, the more they will conceptualize their own direction from the limited information available to them. Keeping 5, 10, 40+ highly competent people pulling in the same direction is very challenging.
Good teams need good managers the way professional athletes need coaches.
Where I live we are allowed to smile for a driver’s license, but not a passport photo. I think it’s because when you are traveling long distances you are going to look miserable so your passport has to reflect that.
I assume it’s easier to process biometric data if the source is normalized. That’s why in my country it’s also important to match your eye-position with an overlay on the screen of the photo-automat.
We can smile in driver’s license photos but smiling in a mug shot is a psychological move. Whenever you see someone frowning or straight faced in a mug shot you have a perception that that person is bad because they look mean. A smiling person seems like a happy person or someone that is likeable. This is why smiling is infectious. It’s seen as a positive thing. More impressionable people or easily deceived people will not think twice about it and fall for it. What matters is that you see it and not just in the mug shot but in all aspects of life.
I think it makes them look deranged. Seeing the mugshot thumbnails before reading the title, I assumed it was a story about a couple of crazy murderers.
I know with context that these people are evil trash, but I don’t think even for the Ill-informed that a smiling mugshot conveys innocence…
I would agree to a point since we are both knowers. However, for the Trump followers this may portray innocence since their perspective is different from our own. And just like us they have a bias towards these kinds of things. I agree they do look quite manic.
That’s the thing. I wasn’t a knower. I live in Australia, and can recognise one person of the nine mugshots I’ve seen today. This is the first I’m hearing about mugshots, and the thumbnail image of the knockoff Purge killers was my first impression. I’m about as unknowing as you can get.
I think it is easy to dismiss “people” as dumb or uninformed, but people generally have pretty good instincts before their news outlet of choice starts spinning.
Ok being Australian does explain a lot. I appreciate your candor and conversation thus far. I am not sure how people are politically in Australia so forgive my ignorance but in America both the Democratic and Republican party wear their party as a badge and often a staple of their personality. Unfortunately it has become a " You’re with us or You’re against us" mentality which helps no one when it comes to talking about issues. Right wing supporters here will go to the grave believing or too stubborn to recognize these people are indeed crooked. Just as the Left will support Hunter Biden even though he is fairly scummy too.
In short, the political bias in America is strong and people dont like to change their mind or admit they are wrong.
According to ABC 13 Eyewitness News in Houston, things started when school trustee Melissa Dungan declared that she had spoken to parents who were upset about “displays of personal ideologies in classrooms.” When pressed for an example, according to the news report, “Dungan referred to a first grade student whose parent claimed they were so upset by a poster showing hands of people of different races, that they transferred classrooms.” … Some other members of the school board did, in fact, argue that there was nothing objectionable about such a poster. But Dungan was backed up by another trustee, Misty Odenweller, who insisted that the depiction of uh, race-mixing was in some way a “violation of the law.” The two women are part of “Mama Bears Rising,” a secretive far-right group fueling the book-banning mania in Conroe and the surrounding area. At least 59 books have been banned due to their efforts.
If we’re not socialized with other races while young, then we grow up thinking of other races as “them” instead of “us”. It’s instincts from when we lived in tribes and anyone that you didn’t grow up around was the enemy. But the same as a dog needing to be exposed to other animals while young so they’re used to them as an adult.
Which is why adult racists have an issue with non-segregated schools.
They want kids to grow up and be racist like they are. They want the next generation to only look as deep as skin color to determine if someone is friend or foe.
Same reason Alabama banned Sesame Street long after PBS had it in every other state.
The individual racists probably don’t understand it, but the ones leading the mobs understand the psychology behind this shit. Like how in American History X Ed Norton didn’t understand what he was doing, but the old asshole in charge was playing chess. Dont discount racists as idiots that don’t know any better. Some are actually smart and manipulating the mob of uneducated idiots.
Pretty much the same in any country with a majority ethnic population. They lived in an area for hundreds, sometimes fighting wars for it, and so it’s not easy to have them give away their lands to people who are completely different down to the religion and imagine a completely different future. America is being pushed to have a civil war over it though likely to other countries interest. One that is very ethnically populated mind you.
I firmly believe that lack of exposure to people of different cultures or races leads people to be racist and not necessarily realize it. If you’re never around X, how can you know you have an inappropriate reaction to X?
To illustrate this, I didn’t know about my escalator phobia until I moved away for college. I entered the mall, saw these moving stair-things, and felt a deep fear in the pit of my stomach. I hadn’t seen an escalator since I was a toddler and, if you’d asked me on high school, I’d have denied having a phobia.
(I’ve successfully worked on my phobia over the last decade, showing that changing inappropriate reactions is possible)
I dunno, white people in the antebellum south had lots of exposure to people of different cultures/races (aka the slaves on which they were economically dependent) and they still managed to be racist as fuck. I think waving away racism as just the result of ignorance obscures its real character as straight-up exploitation of other human beings.
I don’t believe ignorance or lack of familiarity is the root of all racism, or even most, just a factor in some of it.
I grew up in a practically all-white school system because I grew up in a practically all-white rural county. I had to unlearn a lot of things when I move to New England. A lot of people never leave their comfort zone.
I believe exposing kids to people from varied backgrounds helps them not grow up to be bigoted. I don’t believe it’s fair to expect minority kids to represent their minority–I had a small taste of that growing up with an unusual last name and accent in my town. I don’t know how to reconcile those two beliefs.
Yes. My experience has been that nobody is as racist as Northern men who move to Florida. My ex said he went to “the white school” in Michigan, up north is segregated for real. We had enforced school integration but as a kid I was not aware of it, just went to school with school kids - it still got sort of segregated but not really, and my kids even less so, it does work.
But then those guys move down here and are not prepared for how diverse our population is. And they react badly.
Same reason Alabama banned Sesame Street long after PBS had it in every other state.
My mother would edit our episodes on VCR with all the spanish parts and visiting other countries out. So we could only watch that show on tape, never off the TV itself.
There is a reason why I have never felt the need to introduce her to her grandchildern.
I remember flipping channels as a kid and happening upon a Spanish-language channel that was playing a fully subbed and dubbed Spanish recording of Sesame Street. I just remember watching in awe as I saw the exact same show I’ve always watched but in a completely different language
The two women are part of “Mama Bears Rising,” a secretive far-right group fueling the book-banning mania in Conroe and the surrounding area.
Do these idiots seriously not have something better to do than to worry about other people reading books. Good god, if I spent my whole life so worried about what other people would doing I don’t think I’d ever live.
Been racist actually takes effort, the lazy thing to do is to accept everyone equally. Because who cares?
They say it’s so teachers can protect themselves and their students (from the consequences of failed gun laws) but really, it’s just because they have to say something – and it can’t be the truth.
At a civilian level, most of them simply don’t care. They’re confident it will never be their kids and they consider a stranger’s children less important than their own easy access to firearms.
But they can’t say that, so they make flowery comments about freedom, defending their family and how they’re the ones keeping America out of the hands of tyrants, even though they staunchly support tyrants and wouldn’t even wear a mask to protect other people, let alone fight and die for them.
On the corporate and political level, there’s good money and easy votes in guns. It’s no different to tobacco, asbestos and everything else they fought to profit from even as it killed people.
But they can’t say that either. So instead, they coordinate what today’s scapegoat is going to be. Computer games? Too many doors? Timid police? Whatever keeps the money flowing.
The important part for all of them is demanding other solutions are tried before gun control. They know they won’t work, but it will buy them more time and the more time they waste, the better.
That’s why their current solution is “free, universal healthcare for everybody in America, including 5 year olds and people who don’t want treatment, done to a standard far beyond even the most cutting edge of medicine, completely and permanently curing people in less time than it takes to buy a gun”.
Which they then block anyway, because it’s important their conditions for supporting gun control are never met.
Despite it’s current reputation, it’s easy to forget how powerful the NRA was in the eighties and nineties. Zero republicans could get on a ballet without the NRA rating seal of approval.
There’s a massive amount of inertia in American politics.
Yes but they seem to be forgetting the very obvious thing that will happen (and has already happened) when you have more guns being brought into schools, even by those you (misguidedly) trust.
For some reason they don't seem to be able to get that not having guns in or anywhere near a school is the best way not to have shootings at schools.
That article highlights just one obvious problem. Here are others:
We can't even rely on our cops to shoot only the people who need to be shot. Now we're going to trust that teachers will be able to perform better under those stresses - which may include the need to shoot one of their own students - than cops do? How on earth does that track?
Legal gun owners go on shooting sprees too. Really easy for you when you are already whitelisted to be showing up to school armed.
A variation on the article I linked: Careless teacher with a gun leaves it in the bathroom and kid finds it and shoots themselves and/or others with it instead of turning it in.
But the solution could be as simple as the gun is locked and retrievable by the teacher either by biometrics or code. It could also trigger a school wide alarm if the firearm is released so it would give other classes a chance to lock down. The option is there if the teacher needs it they don’t need to be having the gun on themselves.
Sure, if none of the teachers ever break the rules or are careless with that system in any way, it will prevent everything except the part where we expect teachers to be better than cops at target identification and using a firearm under stress, and also expect them to be willing to shoot a student they know personally.
We're also expecting them to accept all the trauma that comes with that, while getting paid shit, and having chosen a career in education.
That’s why I said the option would be there if they chose it. They wouldn’t be required to but it would be nice that they had the option to fight for their life.
And teachers have to deal with an incredibly stressful situation all day which ever-restrictive Republican education laws in many states make even more stressful. Put guns in the mix and one of them will go postal one day.
They want armed teachers because the alternative is gun control. They don’t want gun control, so apparently throwing fire on a burning house is now the way to put out fires.
I hate how people talk about off grid living as something you can pull off alone, that’s difficult even if you allow for buying food and installing all kinds of fancy infrastructure in your home.
The truth is that properly sustainable and reliable off-grid living requires a small community, because you need a lot of labour.
I read a book a while back about the real life of the author of little house on the prairie (it’s called “prairie fires”) - her books really sugarcoat how hard life was - even people who knew how to live off the land had a really hard time
Now there are people who live off the grid in places like Alaska (just watch Life Below Zero) and do it successfully… But these people grew up doing that or studied and prepared A LOT. And man, doing that solo is not easy. None of them seemed to be super healthy or cheerful.
But even in the story they went into town for food and blankets, and they didn’t try to winter in a tent.
I don’t know this guy, but even Superman needs a backup plan in case he gets sick, and infected wound or ruins his ankle by tripping over something. Living off grid alone is just one misstep away from catastrophe.
You nailed it. And these folks were simply living off canned food and ramen… For how long?
Communal living is great if you get the right mix of people with a shared vision… In the right location… With the right resources… To be successful it seems you need to have a pretty organic evolution of the process and attract people with shared vision. The dark side of this devolves into cultism; the brighter side is a sustainable living and sense of belonging.
Now there are people who live off the grid in places like Alaska (just watch Life Below Zero) and do it successfully… But these people grew up doing that or studied and prepared A LOT. And man, doing that solo is not easy. None of them seemed to be super healthy or cheerful.
I am reminded of that guy who did that in Alaska solo, for like 30 years Dick Perniky or some such I believe his name was. He took video of wildlife and got it edited. I think he was 50 or there abouts when he left the lower 48.
Had a good friend of 30 years, tell me over the phone that my kids and I should be shot because I didn’t immediately feel sorry for Trump being shot at.
I told him, “This is a direct result of pushing division, guns being able to be bought with amazing ease, and it will probably happen again.”
He said, “I wish the same thing that happened to Trump to happen to you and your kids.” and hung up.
Friendship over. I’m not being friends with anyone who wishes my kids to be killed.
Yikes. The parasocial relationship people have with Trump is psychotic - this guy clearly felt like an attempt on Trump’s life by a random nutjob was equivalent to an attempt on his own life by whoever is arguing with him.
Saved you a click: The Vermont senator said Musk has done “an exceptional job of demonstrating a point that we have made for years—and that is the fact we live in an oligarchic society.”
“You have the constitutional right to challenge any other voter in your county,” Frank said at Cherokee County Republican headquarters in Woodstock. “In fact, it’s not merely your right. It’s your duty to clean the voter rolls.”
Which Constitution says that? Not the US Constitution, the word “challenge” doesn’t appear there at all. And not in the section of the Georgia State constitution regarding voting, either. Is there a secret MAGA Constitution which only they know about, but applies to everyone? That might explain some of the recent SCOTUS shenanigans.
You joke, but I have always thought that the reason why the modern Conservative movement leans so heavily on the Founders is that they want to call a constitutional convention to rewrite the whole thing from scratch, and become the new Founders who courts 200+ years from now have to defer to.
Just to be clear on this again, they aren’t “stuck” because they’re in danger, the stay keeps getting extended so engineers can gather as much information as possible about the leaks before they return. Starliner is still fully capable of reentry, but this is Boeing’s last chance to collect data that can be used to fix these issues in the future. The leak problem is in Starliner’s service module, which detaches from the capsule before reentry and burns up in the atmosphere, so there won’t be anything left to study after the astronauts return.
I’m sure the astronauts that have to do all this extra overtime because boeing thought their space capsule didn’t have to be airtight probably feel that way
Wanted to clarify again since I wasn’t specific earlier. The capsule itself is airtight, no danger there. What’s leaking is helium, which is kept in compressed tanks in the service module and used to pressurize the reaction control system thrusters. The tanks aren’t leaking though, it sounds like the leak is somewhere between the tank and the thrusters, which is what needs to be researched.
I’ll also clarify. I was being totally hyperbolic. I do understand it’s not actually air, but I’m not too worried about misrepresenting Boeing at the moment
I get that, but because the leak isn’t even on the part of Starliner that will go through reentry, whether or not it will impact its ability to survive the return trip shouldn’t be in question.
People keep saying that, but it isn’t true that the leak being in the disposable part of the vehicle means it’s not a safety problem.
It’s the pressurisation system for the thrusters. If that fails, then they won’t be able to control the capsule until it hits the atmosphere. That could mean they get stuck on the ISS, in the most extreme case, or it could mean that they lose thrust mid-manouvre and they re-enter the atmosphere incorrectly. That could be anywhere from inconvenient (they miss their landing spot and someone has to come get them), to dangerous (they land so far away that they’re in danger of sinking or being eaten by bears before anyone reaches them) to outright fatal (they skip off the atmosphere, or tumble their way into reentry and burn up)
This is a good point. It’s definitely a possibility something catastrophic could happen like that, but the small scale of the leaks and amount of extra helium on board makes it very unlikely at least.
to dangerous (they land so far away that they’re in danger of… being eaten by bears before anyone reaches them)
I know Soyuz was designed to land in Kazakhstan or whatever, but is Starliner (or Dragon, for that matter) even capable of landing on solid ground without damage and/or injuries?
Yes it is actually! When it finally returns, this Starliner will be landing in New Mexico at the White Sands Space Harbor, which is basically a backup space shuttle landing strip.
It’s not designed to like Starliner, but Dragon can in emergency situations. Starliner has airbags to cushion it on touchdown, but Dragon doesn’t so it would probably be a much rougher landing for the astronauts.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.