domain:npr.org
I usually wonder about this kind of thing in a different sense, because men in spheres bemoaning lack of trad values often mention virginity but I'm never clear on if they're offering the same virginity themselves.
You aren't clear because it is not relevant. Nobody cares if the groom is not a virgin, least of all the bride. Look up mate choice copying (or, as PUAs call it, pre-selection).
It's like worrying about how the groom will look in a dress.
As far as I can tell, TACO is somewhat responsible, but also, average US tariff rates are just over 50% on Chinese goods?
It seems fairly plausible that TACO/other delays in tariff implementation are substantially responsible. The "Liberation Day" tariffs weren't just a hike on (already high) tariffs on China - they were (supposed to be) a sweeping set of tariffs applying to basically everyone. China is a big trading partner, but it's still only ("only") a little over 10% of US imports. A moderate-to-high increase in the price of Chinese imports is not going to single-handed crash the US economy (especially since I expect re-exportation and other means of evasion to mitigate it to some degree), and given existing stocks and possible mitigation strategies, major impacts might be quite delayed.
On the other hand, if the April 2nd tariffs had gone into effect quickly, we'd likely be looking at a very different state of affairs.
You've distorted his claim that women should be accountable just like everyone else to imply that he says that only women need to be held accountable
No I didn't.
We also dislike people declaring they have reported someone. "I'm telling on you!" is not any more effective or impressive here than it was in kindergarten. What is that supposed to accomplish? Put extra pressure on the mods? We can see your report. Submit your report and move on.
Apologies then, I will not do this in the future.
Yes, of course; that's why I mentioned it. It's a funny story, and in some ways the pastor made nerdy, clumsy me feel like a paragon of social grace by comparison. It's not an example to imitate.
And yet... I don't know. The whole service was so incredibly earnest in a way most weddings, even Christian weddings, are not. It wasn't a show. It wasn't just a party. It wasn't a chance for the bride and groom to show off. Great is Thy Faithfulness may never have been sung more sincerely.
The liturgy would not have impressed Cranmer. The preaching would not have impressed Edwards or Baucham. But God was glorified anyway.
You have taken him out of context. If you look a few posts down, you see that he also says that people already understand that men need to be held accountable. You've distorted his claim that women should be accountable just like everyone else to imply that he says that only women need to be held accountable.
No, that's precisely the kind of rights-based mindset that I'm describing as not being duty-based.
If he owes the duty to other people, his mindset isn't the only one--there's also the other people's mindset to consider. And they may think that they are owed, but that they don't owe. It's exploitation by them.
If it was Maxwell and the lynchpin of so many online conspiracy theories, why can’t the powers that be (which surely have access to Reddit or - at worst - Ghislaine’s recovery email) just log in as her and post something?
And besides, you again ignore the entire point. In one of the most expensive intelligence operations in modern history, the most banal, easiest, entry level bulk reposting of links (which would have been botted even back then) was supposedly manually done by a middle aged ultra-rich heiress who knew many of the most powerful people in the world and who was moonlighting as a Reddit powermod and farming karma by reposting (in 99.9% of cases) uncontroversial news stories, the kind of thing any third world teen on a gig work site would have done for $3 an hour and which, in the most sensitive cases, would have been done by 22 year old junior intelligence analysts on their first job.
“Sorry, Your Royal Highness, I’m going to have to interrupt our drinks so I can repost an article about an avalanche in Spain on Reddit for 500 karma because the huge intelligence operation I work for values me not for my contacts and charisma but because I can press submit on m.reddit.com several dozen times a day, a skill nobody else you have access to can do”?
You continue holding the idea of these people behaving in predefined ways. They don't. You think they wouldn't use an account with their own last name. Yeah, they would. I wouldn't even say it for the tin foil "Triple bluff." No, they just don't actually think about these things. Opsec is often comically bad, it just sort of works out anyway because nobody gives a shit and people are actually really good at keeping their mouths shut. Though for what it's worth, what you are describing is in fact perfect opsec, because you've convinced yourself it couldn't possibly be her.
So. The patterns suggestive to internet sleuths that account was hers is due to "comically bad" opsec, which enable the sleuths to make the connection. Whereas simultaneously, all the other contradictory patterns (rest of accounts post history) suggestive of coincidence is "perfect opsec", and can be dismissed.
No. I’m familiar with oxygen-acetylene reactions in the context of welding and thought the portmanteau with hydroxychloroquine sounded cool.
We're not going to take sides in a situation like this. People accuse other posters of misrepresenting and strawmanning them all the time. Sometimes people are misrepresenting and strawmanning other posters, but y'all need to work this out yourselves-civilly!-or let it go.
When we do intervene is when threads become pointless back and forth exchanges of "Did not!" "Did too!" Which is what this is becoming.
We also dislike people declaring they have reported someone. "I'm telling on you!" is not any more effective or impressive here than it was in kindergarten. What is that supposed to accomplish? Put extra pressure on the mods? We can see your report. Submit your report and move on.
I’m guessing nobody in this story was thinking with the brain.
I should add, it is possible that someone made a miscalculation of recruiting Epstein to run an op, it is not literally impossible, miscalculations happen. It is reason to downweight it as an explanation.
You then stake on the idea of intelligence agencies not working with liars and conmen, that's exactly what they do. Treachery, betrayal, is considered the gravest sin. The lowest circle of the Inferno, the ice is full of traitors. What has the US done, time and again?
I think this is ideosyncratic chain of thought and mostly irrelevant as a consideration to intelligence agencies.
Important part is not that Esptein was a liar, it's the narcissim and bragging. It is a more profile of source of leaks than than someone who would be responsible for running anything. Putting this guy in charge of any operation would have been a miscalculation, exactly because he was sort of guy who would be caught. And look, he was caught and convicted, twice.
I could be as well as that Epstein had some connections but also overinflated ego which lead to running a blackmail operation on his own initiative. Perhaps he offered services to whatever genuine CIA/Mossad connections. Perhaps he put up airs of intelligence connections in order to appear more serious and invulnerable, and the rest of the weirdness surrounding his circumstances was because of regular interpersonal corruption and blackmail.
Paedophilia is the term that needs definition. There have been some extreme claims of 12-14 year olds being raped, but it seems in the main to be more "underage by American law" which is "not 18 yet" (in other countries, age of consent is 16, for example).
Actually, the age of consent in America varies by state, from 16 to 18. The myth that it's a flat 18 across the country is due to the fact that virtually all television and movies are made in California, where it is indeed 18.
He's the kind of guy who spent his life regurgitating official stats without a hint of critical thinking, because that's what a good student / smart person does, right? But when he gets pushed back, he shows the black heart of a concentration camp guard, just, you know, impotent and sad.
Like a year and a half ago, he got into it with Steve Sailer on HBD. Sailer was polite, but the pile-ons were like watching a herd of lions toy with a sickly gazelle. And Will just did not seem to have the slightest idea how to actually mount an argument when he had to think for himself instead of just repeating the NYT or government stats and he quickly devolved into Downfall, Hitler-In-The-Bunker tier scitzo-ranting about how everyone who disagreed with him were "vermin" who needed to be "expunged", mixed with plaintive cries begging to know why no one else in his tribe was helping him. Why did he argue against the hordes of darkness alone?
And the hordes just spammed him with lines like "Because they know how this ends" and "NO ONE IS COMING TO SAVE YOU, WILL".
He's just kind of the biggest, most easily riled dork on the internet, and he can't help himself but enagage every time.
if you had launched into your impassioned screen in response to this
Would not be possible as that is a response to my impassioned screed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporal_paradox
As an aside this is kind of confusing because "third worldism" has a different more common meaning related to anti-imperialism. It took a few times of you using and me scratching my head to realize you were using the term to mean something like sweatshop romanticism.
I'm repurposing it because the hero of the Online Right should be some unvaccinated Bengali peasant who drinks raw milk and does honest labor in a farm or factory rather than effeminizing fake email jobs and trusts religious authorities rather than scientists.
Oookay. I don't know what the hell the mistress thought was going to happen, and I don't know why the hell the guy agreed to introduce his mistress to his wife. Clearly he was not thinking with his brain there.
It's the attitude that drugs do no harm, the only harm is them being illegal. Similar to the push about the harm that adults having sex with kids isn't from the sex, it's from the social stigma around it which teaches the child to be ashamed and that they were harmed.
The people who push that attitude want to fuck kids without consequences. The people who want to push that "it's the illegal status that does the harm" around drugs also want no consequences from what they want to do.
But there will always be consequences. Being a druggie didn't make the 'friend' a chill, kind, guy. It made him paranoid and violent (on top of whatever crazy he has going on).
Social conservatives in America decided to make that the centerpiece of their political project and then get mad when I bring it up in response to a thread about social conservatism in America.
If it wasn't for her getting arrested, would anyone have ever made the connection? Rich powerful people are known for having massive egos and dangling random loose threads for no reason other than their own egotistical enjoyment.
We're dealing with an account that in a very short time period slightly before public knowledge of the arrest decided to go from posting all the time to not posting at all. Why?
And it's not death, the Worldnews moderation team insisted that maxwellhill is still alive and just not posting for ... unexplained reasons.
The mods posted a DM claiming he is active, but why a DM which is super easy to fake and not an actual public post which wouldn't be faked? If maxwellhill doesn't want people to know the account is still active then why do the DM and let fellow mods reveal it, if they don't mind providing proof they're not in prison then why not just post a comment?
They say he's just a random Mayalasian man who lives there too, but he seems to treat Maylasia as a country he just visits normally
Have you ever once talked about the country you live in as something you're "visiting"?
And they have a birthday right around the same time
Maxwell is Dec 25, MaxwellHill is past Dec 21.
So we have an account with a similar name, many similar interests, that just happens to be really busy and stop posting for years right before Maxwell got publically arrested who shares a similar birthday, refers to his home country as a place he visits, doesn't prove his existence for vague and completely irrational reasons.
If it's not Ghislaine Maxwell, it's a person (a long with the rest of the mods) trying really really hard to be as suspicious as possible and likely has insider information about what is happening to her in order to coordinate stopping posts right then. Because again they could just post a comment if the account was actually still active and not have to share easily faked DMs.
Oh, yeah. "He's not like that with me" up to the minute he is like that.
I don't get it, I genuinely don't. "Love" must be one hell of a drug, to hollow your brain out like that.
Also, in a lot of these situations and that class, the guy doesn't give a damn about if the woman gets knocked up or what. If she wants babies, fine. If she doesn't want babies, fine. It's her job to ensure she doesn't get pregnant. So it's perfectly plausible he'd threaten to kill the baby because it isn't his baby to him in any meaningful way. (The only use of "my client is a father of three children" to the likes of those scumbags is so their lawyers can plead them off in court).
Had experience a couple of years back with a family member who tried suicide, and despite their protestations, it was one of the "cry for help" types rather than genuine "will kill myself for sure". They certainly intended to die, but the method they picked wasn't 100% fatal (indeed, looking it up, it wouldn't have been fatal at all but they didn't know that).
So yeah, people can try and kill themselves and even be serious about it, but not so serious as to pick a really working method. I think Epstein was the kind of guy who would try and use a suicide attempt to bargain his way out of things, he just mis-timed it and it turned out it worked.
I remain impressed by how you manage to drag abortion in to any discussion whatsoever. Nobody was talking about 19th century attitudes to the personhood of the foetus, but there you went!
I'm not debating whether Hoss was tortured.
I'm pointing out his gave a consistent account for a long time after that. Weird that his torturers allowed him to claim he had been tortured, but were able to force him to never recant his overall narrative.
Did you even skim the source I provided that discussed corroboration? Are you just gonna ignore the sources I provide and questions I pose and whine whine whine about how it's the mainstream that's incapable of engaging with reality?
What's funny is that when I provide such corroboration, or ask harder questions for you than you can ask of me, you seem to ignore it.
Were the camps merely for labor? If so, why destroy and bury them?
How would you expect the Nazis to conduct a secret operation and cover up?
That's not what my sources say. Do you have better ones?
Why was the facility buried?
Well, as you love to point out, they haven't been allowed to do a full excavation. They found evidence of structures that matched accounts of the gas chambers and found tiles when they dug. What level of excavation would make you happy?
Ok, so then why did the Nazis destroy and bury the structures? Do you expect the Nazis to be retarded enough to put: "Fake Sanitary Facility Actually Intended As A Means Of Mass Execution" in the budget documents? What level of evidence is actually reasonable to expect?
Not sure what your issue is. The human bones were ground up. The soil was disturbed/tilled, so a fossil could have been in the mix. If the shark tooth was so damning, you'd think that would have been covered up so clever Revisionists like you couldn't use it.
Did the media write Mein Kampf? Did it write the speeches Hitler made? Did it compile lists of Jews, make them wear stars, tattoo ID numbers on them, and put them into ghettos and camps?
Does any part of your mind wince a little bit when you notice that you can't stop focusing on the alleged gassing inconsistencies, and you fail to engage with what on earth were the Nazis up to with the Jews and where several million of them ended up? Do you cringe at all when you have to consider that the Nazis operated in a secretive manner with a cover up to hide and destroy evidence, such that imperfect evidence is what would be expected?
Wait, the Nazis were supposed to be shipping the Jews out??? WOW WHAT A GIANT MISUNDERSTANDING THIS ALL IS.
Is that what Hitler meant by "annihilation"?
But the biggest question remains: WHERE DID THE MILLIONS OF JEWS END UP THEN??????????
Again, the biggest tell here is that you simply can't deal with the overarching facts that the Nazis hated the Jews, rounded them up, and then millions of them no longer existed. (The fact you haven't even tried to contend with this rather significant issue is pretty interesting. You have all kinds of ideas and sources re: Hoss and gas chambers and human remains, but not for Jewish population statistics apparently.)
You've also not addressed the false claims you've made about the COMINT/intercepts not having any evidence of the Holocaust. Do you see why people have a hard time respecting your views and the claim that actually you're just a no-nonsense realist concerned only with the truth?
So to sum up where I think we're at:
Where did the millions of Jews go?
Ah, is that why people hate the Jews so much? When they suffer, they deserve it, of course. But when they don't suffer sufficiently they have to lie about it?
Here's a joke I just came up with:
A Holocaust Revisionist dies and goes to Valhalla. He gets to meet Hitler. The Revisionist says, "I tried my best to combat the lies they tell about you trying to exterminate the Jews." Hitler responds, "Well thank you; we tried our best, but I'll always regret we didn't fully annihilate those bloodsuckers."
"Oh no, the Zionist propagandists got you too," cried the Revisionist.
I'll have to workshop it a bit.
More options
Context Copy link