@Nwallins's banner p

Nwallins

Finally updated my bookmark

0 followers   follows 3 users  
joined 2022 September 04 23:17:52 UTC

				

User ID: 265

Nwallins

Finally updated my bookmark

0 followers   follows 3 users   joined 2022 September 04 23:17:52 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 265

That a subset of them when other progressives are unwelcoming they turn to the right but they don't think they have done anything wrong.

I've spent about 60 seconds on this sentence and I'm still not sure I understand. For clarity, do all 3 theys refer to the same group, that subset of liberals?

"anarchist" who sees long dead penny ante dictator as divine being? Why not, point of real free speech is the opportunity to hear all voices!

This seems extremely petty. There is an underlying principle of free speech, here, and the desire to encounter the speech of another is in no way an endorsement or worship of the other. Come on, really?!

For me, the alt-right was the Tea Party, opposing bank bailouts and obstructing big government from a libertarian perspective. This was not the old Moral Majority focused on respectability but instead bomb throwers fed up with the status quo. This well predates the rise of Trump and emergence of Richard Spencer.

The term was an amorphous label that could be placed on a wide dispersion of groups that harbor major mutual disagreements.

Related h/t @ymeskhout

This guy is talking about "leftism" as a shibboleth for what I would call radical progressive. People who call themselves "leftists" and hate "libs". Literally abolish the police, end capitalism, Portland / Seattle Black Bloc.

In the above essay, the author is a former leftist examining the pathology that leads to minimizing Hamas atrocities. The latent desire in American leftism to Fuck Shit Up needs a dastardly target to excuse its behavior.

The theme is: the hegemon failing to impose its will in particular direction

Could the lack of inclination possibly be covering for a lack of competence?

It will be interesting to see what happens in the next 5 days. Number one, Israel expects Hamas to violate the the ceasefire, per usual. Of course this suggests a false flag attack as well, where Israel stages a pretext for a retaliatory response. I expect that Hamas accepts the cease-fire posture at the top, but there may be provocations and skirmishes at low levels originating on both sides. I doubt we will get to the first 5 days without a major violation or conflict.

Prediction: 5 day ceasefire is honored by both sides, as judged by lack of hostilities or contention by the end of the period: 50%

This includes a successful hostage exchange. I expect there to be minor quibbles and contention. But we should know, broadly and deeply, whether each side is reasonably satisfied.

If the first 5 days go acceptably for both sides, the next 5 are likely to as well.

Prediction: 10 days of ceasefire and hostage exchanges are "successful" (not without hurdles and reversals): 10%

Again, are both sides reasonably satisfied?

I think Hamas considers any dead Palestinian, at Israeli hands, to be a martyr. Combatant or not, civilian or otherwise.

Foreign policy is a thing, and Israel is one of the US' most steadfast allies outside of the Anglosphere and the #1 ally in the Middle East, modulo oil and weapons deals with the Saudis.

There is also the question of shared values. Liberal democracies are natural allies, unlike the rest of the Middle East.

It has very little to do with religion or ethnicity, IMHO.

B I N L A D E N

I've seen many claims of Hamas militants being drug- or meth-fueled, along with some healthy skepticism of such. Based on what, exactly?

It's called Captagon

Hamas terrorists who carried out a surprise attack on October 7 were found to be under the influence of Captagon, a synthetic amphetamine-type stimulant that has been clandestinely produced in southern Europe and trafficked through Turkey to the consumer markets on the Arabian Peninsula, as reported by Nir Dvori of Channel 12.

The pills were recovered from the pockets of many terrorists who lost their lives on Israeli soil.


Captagon belongs to the amphetamine family and was initially developed to address attention disorders, narcolepsy, and depression. Despite its highly addictive nature and potential for inducing psychotic reactions, it continues to enjoy popularity in the Middle East due to its affordability and ease of manufacturing. In poorer countries, the drug can be purchased for a dollar or two, while in wealthier nations, it may cost up to 20 dollars per pill.

Its primary effects include arousing feelings of euphoria, reducing the need for sleep, suppressing appetite, and providing sustained energy.

According to medical professionals in Lebanon and Syria, Captagon is not only prevalent among fighters but is also frequently used by desperate civilians residing in conflict zones.

Once a source of revenue for ISIS members through drug smuggling, Captagon has now become a major source of income for Syria and is actively supported by Hezbollah.

Around two years ago, an investigation conducted by The New York Times revealed that individuals associated with Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, including family members, had established a thriving industry for the production of Captagon.

Homeboy, throw in the towel

Your shit got fucked by Sidney Powell

Apologies to The Beastie Boys

I wish your first link was something other than a google search result, which will of course change drastically over time, complicating any analysis or discussion.

It looks like Israel bombed a neighboring residence (I would expect an apartment building but the current results refer to a "house"). It seems strange that the Israelis would bomb a single family residence (aka "house"). And the damage extended, presumably unintentionally, to the church.

I suppose we'll see if there is a characteristic Israeli crater or not. And at this point, maybe Israel can drop the equivalent of small barrel bombs as a false flag to implicate Hamas, etc.

I doubt Israel intentionally bombed a church unless it was a legitimate military target, which is entirely possible given the defensive strategy of Hamas, etc. I tend to defer to Arnold Kling's reasoning for this type of situation: https://arnoldkling.substack.com/p/the-gaza-hospital-tragedy

Wellllllll...

Her agentic boost, the ability to overturn a prior decision, comes from the outside, not from within, premised upon her supposed lack of agency. Affirmative action, if you will. An outside finger on the scale to mask weakness is not actual strength.

The Art of the Steal, perhaps?

St Pierre and Miquelon are islands off the coast of Newfoundland. It seems misleading to call that a border.

Rhabdoviridae

Interesting, is this related to the rhabdo that Crossfitters get? Rhabdomyalysis? Something to do with kidneys and hydration?

The article is ungated for me, FYI

Your two links appear to be identical.

Europe is certainly capable of turning back migrants. They choose not to.

Wow, so Europe can stop illegal immigrants from taking boats across the Mediterranean simply by refusing a port pass? Why haven't they thought of this?

I dunno about a port pass, but yes, they can. They have thought of this.

It's sometimes referred to as "turnback policy" under international maritime law, as I understand.

Foreign vessels have a right of innocent passage in a state’s territorial sea (up to 12 miles from shore) under article 17 LOSC. If passage is not innocent, such as when domestic immigration laws are breached, states can take necessary steps to prevent passage. For seaworthy vessels, this is generally unproblematic. It may be that the UK government expects to rely on some iteration of this principle.

But if a vessel determines and justifies that it is in distress, it can enter the state’s territorial sea, according to an exception in article 18 LOSC. The duty to render assistance is also still applicable, even where the state believes that migration offences have been committed by those in peril.

For this same reasoning, multiple trips to Iranian port will be denied. And when the first trip is denied, the boat remains full and unable to take on additional migrants.

Do you know why IV fluids fail to hydrate? I am only going off wikipedia here, and maybe errantly...

I just re-learned about rabies, in the last 10 days:

  • if you're symptomatic, you're a dead man walking
  • symptoms take weeks to months to present
  • symptoms include hydrophobia, which is an intense thirst combined with your musculoskeletal system refusing to accept water (via the nervous system)
  • IV fluids for some reason do not ameliorate
  • "foaming at the mouth" is related to increased saliva production combined with an inability to swallow said fluids
  • zombie-like symptoms including an instinct to bite others
  • transmitted primarily via saliva
  • zoonotic reservoirs are mostly bats and rodents, with dogs as the bridge to humans
  • very few canine or human cases in countries like USA
  • a really shit way to go
  • less prevalent but more scary than I thought

I don't disagree. They could have been overwhelmed in a full engagement, but recon is a thing. Run the border, run away, report back, and engage when advantageous. I'm thinking about a SWAT team as multiple vehicles and maybe 20 personnel.

Maybe this stuff was going on, but only the Israelis know.

Or you need 100 boats with 1000 person capacity if each one takes 10 trips.

Multiple trips are not realistic. I'm happy to explain why, but that shouldn't be necessary.

As I see it, Israel + USA.

Good luck with gaining access to Iranian ports.

Yes, Iran certainly does have the ability to shoot guns at boats full of Palestinian refugees while the cameras broadcast videos of innocent women and children dying to the world.

Refusing port does not imply shooting guns.

Getting from the Meditterranean to the Persian Gulf is a far simpler logistical problem than Persian Gulf to America

The destination is rhetorical. Iran can perform the same maneuver at any port of their choosing.

Your reply here is mostly fantasy.

As of December 2021, there were 323 cruise ships operating worldwide, with a combined capacity of 581,200 passengers.

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

You'd need 1000 boats with 1000 person capacity to move a million refugees. Among the refugees would almost certainly be terrorists and crypto-militants. Obviously no weapons would be allowed on board, despite a small chance of smuggling efforts succeeding. So you will need a sizeable police force. And can you trust all of the police to maintain control of their weapons and populace, and not support some kind of mutiny?

Food and water could probably be handled.

Who is paying for this, and in charge? Israel? The UN? Someone will have to take responsibility for the Iran destination, and that will prove quite contentious. Iran can reasonably blockade and/or refuse port. Eventually conditions onboard deteriorate. Maybe the crew abandons ship? Iran could commandeer the ships and park them at the Port Authority of NY/NJ.

It's whimsical but seems quite unrealistic to me.