FirmWeird
Randomly Generated Reddit Username
No bio...
User ID: 757
The Epstein lead died when he did, because he wasn't stupid enough to actually write down the truly incriminating details.
This is just incorrect - there's at least one former ambassador from Mexico who is getting burned by the revelation that he fathered a child with an 11 year old girl in Mexico. But moreover, it wasn't stupidity that lead to him writing down the truly incriminating details. He most likely believed that his connections would allow him to escape any kind of serious punishment, and when he received a sweetheart deal due to "belonging to intelligence" he was proven correct. Even then, there are actually things that he considered too sensitive to put into an email - see the one where he's asked if he has anyone with influence over Assad. I don't even think it counts as stupidity - why bother protecting yourself from the intelligence agencies reading your email when you can just call up the people in charge of those intelligence agencies and ask them to get you out of trouble?
Was Ghislaine actually a reddit mod?
Several /u/Maxwellhill posts were included as evidence against her by the FBI. Not quite confirmation, but as close as we can get barring an actual confession in my opinion.
We would also have to reject the independence of India and most of Africa.
I don't think that those situations are really comparable. An existing nation changing their head of state doesn't seem to me like it would set a precedent applicable here.
I'm referring to the ideology commonly referred to its opponents as 'wokeness',
I am explicitly against wokeness and social justice politics - I think they were a bad move on the part of the left and made it less effective. My personal conspiracy theory is that it was imposed by bad actors to defang the OWS protests, but I have no evidence for it and it is explicitly just wishful thinking that I hope is true rather than any actually justified belief.
Your acknowledgement that the Palestinians as much as the Israelis need to learn to co-exist with people who aren't them would be quite rare in many universities.
Not in my experience. A lot of people realise that there is a portion of the Israeli population who genuinely have nowhere else to go, despite the vast portions of the Israeli population that can just go back to Poland or France or whatever. Once you throw in real, muscular denazification efforts (i.e. prosecutions for anyone connected to war crimes, like whoever gave the order to bulldoze piles of civilian bodies to that soldier who killed himself) and efforts to achieve justice, I'm sure the Palestinians would welcome the remainder.
I do not condone the killing of non-combatants, even if they are on the same side that started it. However, the Arab forces were not innocent in that regard.
The village itself had actually made a peace deal - who cares what the "arab forces" had done in this specific context? By supporting the claiming of territory via acts like that massacre, you are actually condoning the killing of non-combatants. By supporting Israel's current genocidal efforts, you are supporting and condoning the killing of non-combatants like Hind Rajab or Mohammed Bhar.
Vladimir Putin, with the little green men
I disagree - if you ignore the role that NATO expansion and the treatment of Russian-speakers after the Maidan you're not really painting an accurate picture of what happened. But that argument has been litigated elsewhere if you really want to get into it.
on 22nd Tishrei 5784 (7th October 2023).
Incorrect - Israel had been bombing, blowing up and illegally settling Palestinian territory for quite some time beforehand.
But is that certain to remain the case? If it changes, and the Jews are no longer safe in America, where will they go then? What about those with less-than-immaculate pasts, or those who are likely to be unable to support themselves?
"Less than immaculate pasts" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. I honestly don't care that Ghislaine Maxwell or her compatriots aren't going to have a homeland of their own - prison or the bottom of the sea seems like a perfectly fine place for those like her with "non-immaculate pasts".
That is why the existence of a Jewish-majority state is seen as non-negotiable by so many.
Then what a shame that this is what they have decided to do with their state - the existence of a German-majority state is seen as non-negotiable by a lot of Germans, but that doesn't mean Nazi Germany should have been allowed to mass-murder Jewish civilians. Maybe after Israel is wiped from the map they can try again somewhere else, and avoid practicing apartheid and ethnic cleansing.
Then they launched the “we are Charlie Kirk” trend, where the emotional memory of name was blotted out as well;
Wasn't "We are Charlie Kirk" just a piece of AI slop music cynically created to make money from uncritical audiences that then got made fun of due to how incredibly schlocky it was? I think it is far mor likely that the song was the result of the market trying to extract money from conservatives than a deliberate conspiracy to destroy his memory.
Hello! My apologies for vanishing but I had some urgent real-life problems (and a vacation) appear. I'm happy to continue this conversation, but I'd rather check in and make sure you still want to continue after this pause first.
In all seriousness, stuff like this is good evidence against larger-scale conspiracy theories.
Not really. Joe Biden performed the top job while completely mentally checked out and unable to function for years and the actions of the government ground on regardless. The people who are actually "conspiring" are usually not the ones who run for President or any other role where they're subject to the will of the people.
Undoing all previous land seizures would involve untangling a colossal rats'-nest of claims and counter-claims, many of which left few if any records; thus we drew a line in the sand at 1945: going forward, no nation would be allowed to take land from another by force of arms.
This is actually where I think the line should be drawn as well - which is one of the reasons why I reject the 1947 borders.
So your proposal would involve both sides receiving remedial 'things they should have learned in kindergarten' lessons?
Yes, absolutely. I'm not sure what your dark intimations about some mysterious ideology are - this is the Motte, we can speak freely here!
Because they didn't start the war.
The Deir Yassin massacre was noteworthy in large part because the village in question had signed a non-aggression pact with the zionist forces (Israel didn't exist yet so they can't really be called Israelis) - and they were ethnically cleansed, paraded about, raped and murdered so that the zionists could take their land via aggression.
If someone gains territory in a war that they started, that incentivises further aggression. If someone loses territory in a war that they started, however....
Then you actually incentivise coming up with a pretext to further legitimise these conflicts or otherwise obscure the identity of who started them, which is a precedent wide open for abuse. Who started the war in Ukraine? Who started the US occupation of Afghanistan? Moreover, who started the current conflict in Gaza that Israel is using to claim territory? Where, exactly, do you draw the line? These are questions complicated enough that there is no real way to answer them consistently in a manner that actually disincentivises war for territory.
Unfortunately, it also leaves the Jewish people, with their long history of persecutions and expulsions,
I mean, seeing how they treat the Palestinians I'm not terribly surprised that they have this long history of persecution and expulsion. But there is actually an answer to this - they should be moved to America, a country which seemingly absolutely loves them and without whose support the existence of modern day Israel would not be possible.
Both of which are outside of pre-1967 Israeli territory;
Yes, and Israel acquired that territory via force of arms. If Israel can do it, why not Russia? If Israel can do it, why can't China do the same to Taiwan?
and as many of the Palestinian Arabs object to Jews existing as equals,
Of Hamas, right? (Padme, her face concerned!)
Of course! But you'd also have to launch mass prosecutions for anyone in the Israeli government who supported the illegal settlements or the military action in Gaza. You'd also have to take every single Israeli who supported the ethnic cleansing of Gaza or otherwise held racist views towards the Palestinians and put them through some re-education, but if there's real accountability and progress I'm confident you could have peace between the two populations.
Do you know of any organisations condemning Israeli actions in Gaza/the West Bank/the Golan Heights who also explicitly reject Palestinian claims on pre-1967 Israeli territory?
I don't care about pre-1967 Israeli territory - why do you think that the perpetrators of the Deir Yassin massacre should be rewarded? I was under the impression that you're opposed to taking territory through violence!
I would prefer that no clay be taken by force of arms; however, if that option is unavailable, and one side or the other must gain from the conflict, I would prefer that the side gaining territory be the side that was minding its own damn business.
But we have a chance to simply undo the entire problem! A single state solution definitively repudiates the idea that claiming territory via force of arms is acceptable. Anything else sends the message that it is perfectly fine, and leaves you unable to condemn anything Russia, China or even North Korea decides it wants to do.
I am referring to both the Golan Heights and the continued expansion of the Yellow line. As for me personally I favour a single-state solution with full democracy, along with some denazification efforts/war-crime prosecutions.
But either way, there's zero credibility in condemnations of wars of aggression for lebensraum that mysteriously pass over Israel, because that makes it clear that it isn't wars of aggression that you're objecting to but some secret other motive. "Wars of aggression are fine for me but not for thee" is not a particularly compelling message that will convince anyone to support your cause.
If wars of territorial aggression become normalised,
If you don't want that, I'll be happy to see you at the anti-Israel protest marches!
No our enemies do not hate us "because we're too cool", they hate us for geopolitical reasons that are completely outside the average American's control. Which just begs the question, why should the average American care what the haters think?
There's actually an extremely good reason for why the average American should care - the same actions that the US' enemies hate the US for are hurting average Americans as well. How much benefit did the average American see from the war in Vietnam? How much benefit did the average American get from the 20 year long occupation in Afghanistan? This is to say nothing of the vast sums of blood and treasure wasted in the Middle East to preserve Israel, a country which has sucked up vast sums of US taxpayer money while domestic infrastructure falls apart. The average American has seen almost no benefits whatsoever from the majority of the US empire's actions overseas, and in many cases they've been actively hurt by them. Sure, they got some cheaper fruit from the CIA's shenanigans in Latin America, but when you factor in the other consequences from destabilising and wrecking all those nations in service of the United Fruit Company I honestly don't know if the juice was worth the squeeze.
Problem with this argument is that Israel was blasting away at Iran's launchers pretty well.
Were they? The entire point of my argument is that we don't actually know this, and can't unless you have access to classified information from inside the Israeli government. How many Iranian missiles/drones made it through the iron dome? What are the remaining numbers of Iranian missiles vs Israeli interceptors? Israel banned people from posting photos of missile impact sites, and it isn't like we can trust reports from Iran about what was going on either. All we can do is make guesses on the basis of the evidence we do have, and that's what I based my evaluation on. That said, if you do have access to a comprehensive damage report from within the Israeli or Iranian government, please do post it here!
This is an extremely difficult question to answer. My personal position is that this was done because US and Israeli interceptor missile stocks were being depleted at far too rapid a pace, and I believe that this is the best explanation for the evidence we have access to. But I don't think it is possible to really make a firm determination on this either way, because the evidence needed to make a definitive statement is classified and/or not available to the public. Given recent reports (of unknown veracity) that Israel promised Russia they wouldn't attack Iran, I find this claim at least plausible - but not enough that I can give an actual answer I would bet money on.
I agree with that phrasing in general, but "supports" is providing a lot of ambiguity here. From the reports I've seen, the Mossad are both supplying weapons and actively participating in the protests ("walking alongside"). While I'm not going to claim that the protests simply wouldn't happen at all in the absence of Mossad involvement, I think supplying weaponry, communication equipment and warm bodies is a significant contribution to the protests. "Supports" could easily be interpreted as an entirely non-material contribution, when that really isn't the case.
Ah, yes, another one of those elaborate Jewish deceptions.
No? There's absolutely nothing elaborate about these "Jewish deceptions" (not the phrasing I'd use personally) at all. I could have whipped together the diagrams and "evidence" provided to the UN on this topic in MS paint with a five minute deadline, and even the Obama whitehouse made a version of it to make fun of Netanyahu. They've just been lying consistently on this topic because it is obviously in their national interest to have the US go in and take out one of their regional enemies without them having to do it themselves.
If you're surprised by CBS news making claims like this are you unaware of their recent(well, a few months ago) purchase and change in leadership? Bari Weiss explicitly attacked the journalistic standards unit at the broadcaster, presumably because the reporting she wants them to focus on and perform would not meet those standards - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/bari-weiss-cbs-news-standards-and-practices-b2862631.html
Ah yes, your inability to reason clearly about a fairly straightforward incentive structure is better explained by the Iranians being fooled by the crafty Jews.
You're being fairly uncharitable here. Mike Pompeo and the Jerusalem post have both made claims that the Mossad is involved in the protests, with Mike specifically wishing the Mossad agents marching alongside the protesters a happy new year and the Mossad explicitly sending a message in Farsi talking about how they were with the protesters and supporting them.
First of all, even if we just take Libya as the example it serves to make my point by itself. When you compare what Libya was before the fall of Gaddafi to the open-air slave markets that replaced him, I can't imagine that any reasonable person would want that for their country (or even any countries near them).
But the point I was trying to make was that the regimes in those countries did fall and get knocked out by American intervention (or assistance in the case of Syria), which is what is being proposed for Iran. In no case did the American intervention result in a positive change for the countries involved - and everyone else in the region can see exactly what happened.
No, I was referring to the Bondi shootings.
Here's another one: Heard much about ISIS lately? Probably not, because we blew the fuck out of them.
ISIS shot and killed numerous people in the city I live in while I was out having dinner with my partner - I actually got to see the police cars leaving to go deal with the active shooters, so I have in fact heard a lot about them recently.
Toppling the regime may or may not play out in the U.S.'s favor,
Can you please point out any regime-toppling exercises that played out in the U.S.'s favor from the past 70 years? I legitimately can't think of any.
On the one hand, this seems like a pretty galaxy-brained take; surely, from the perspective of the man in the streets of Tehran or Havana, the more obvious conclusion is, “If our regime fell and we played ball with the Americans, they’d lift the sanctions and we wouldn’t be poor!”
Absolutely nobody is going to think this. They are going to look at what happened when the regimes in Libya, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan fell and they played ball with the Americans. Compared to what Libya turned into, the regime is going to look pretty great by comparison.
This is only true if you assume there are more suicidal police than people willing to run over police officers, which I'm not sure is actually true. It sounds to me like this is just feeding police officers to homicidal car-drivers.
Isn't this approach going to unnecessarily put the lives of police officers in danger? Sure, if you're dealing with a reasonable person who committed a crime of passion or something they're going to think twice about running over a cop, but if you're looking at a career criminal who will already be getting a life sentence if they get caught... why wouldn't they just run the cop over?
- Prev
- Next

Epstein wasn't a tax-dodge bro, he was an underage sex slave and blackmail supplier "bro". The reason he didn't need to spend any effort or time securing his work (see all the "had fun raping kids - jeff, sent from my ipad" emails) was because he knew that if he ever got picked up by the security organisations he'd just make a call to their boss and have the case called off - see Acosta giving him a sweetheart deal because he "belonged to intelligence".
More options
Context Copy link