koti

3 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

You guys are tripping over yourselves on this. You might ask yourselves why.

I find it scary. It’s one thing when a bunch of undereducated morons support Trump with dangerous views and actions but when the educated „elite” closes its eyes and ears while doing backflips to justify something which is not possible to justify, it’s a whole different ball game.

29 minutes ago, swansont said:

Well, it may not be your point, but it’s my point, and bringing up a different point (if that’s what’s in the video) does not rebut this. 

Right. I'd say that closing your eyes, covering your ears and yelling "I don't wanna see it!" will not cure cancer either.

1 minute ago, swansont said:

The fact that the first ~100 justices were white males means that merit was not the sole factor in their choice. So the concern rings quite hollow.

I agree but this is not the point. The point is that curing cancer with burning someone alive is not a good cure, the afro american woman in the video understands this. 

My original post is a transcript I made from the below interview and Jordan Peterson has nothing to do with it:
 

I used a Jordan Peterson lens, thinking that maybe some of us could grab a more objective and broader view of things?

20 minutes ago, swansont said:

The first ~100 justices were white males, and there wasn’t widespread concern about the lack of diversity in considering justices throughout that period, so you’ll excuse me if I’m not impressed by faux outrage from some blowhard.

The fact that first ~100 justices were white males should not override that merit and competence should be the factors for choosing them an not a pre-defined set of factors like sex/gender/color of one skin. Would you be more impressed by this faux outrage if it came from a black female instead of a white male?

13 minutes ago, exchemist said:

You need justices that represent the range of people they are judging. And by any standards this candidate seems better qualified than some of the recent appointees. If she were no good she would not have been confirmed. 

What Peterson is saying is that it was decided prior that a black female will be nominated and that affirmative action is essencially robing all people involved, it seems to me that this is a deeper subject than "you need justices that represent the range of people they are judging"

 

Quote

(Peterson is a bit of a tosser, in my opinion.) 

What do you mean ?

Jordan Peterson said something along the lines of the Supreme court nomination being racist from the begining because the US administration said they are going to pick a black female and people do not understand what the issue is with affirmative action, he states that not only it is racist because we are ignoring an entire set of people who have appplied for this job but we are actually creating a climate of racism because now as individuals we have to look at people of color who are in these high positions and were going to say - Did you really get that position based on your merit or did you get it because youre black or youre female? And the people involved are going to look at themselves and ask themselves - Did I get that based on merit or did I get it because I'm a black person? Which in result he states, robs every single person involved in this situation.

I'm curious what folks think about this.

It's my 21 year old music set I'm listening to tonight from the time I was making my life as a dj, it was the best time of my life.
 

On 4/1/2022 at 12:35 AM, zapatos said:

I've wondered if their tumultuous relationship influenced his reaction. 

Besides her cheating on him for years and it all ending up in their „open relationship” which seems to be eating him up from the inside, their kids have been attending Scientology schools since they were 3 years old which is ridiculous.

5 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I've wondered if their tumultuous relationship influenced his reaction. 

„Burzliwy” „Wzburzony”

Thank you for this, I admit I did not know that word.

2 hours ago, MigL said:

Whether it was a good joke, or not, or even whether it was funny or offensive is not the issue here.
There have been plenty of bad jokes made by comedians, and plenty of insensitive ones; those are all subjective for the audience.

What is not subjective is Will Smith's response; there is no argument that can be made to justify it.

Does this really warrant further discussion ?

I think Tom Segura's comment on twitter was spot on:

"Fuck Will Smith's candy ass smacking a dude 4 inches shorter and 50lbs lighter. He's just in his feelings cause his bald headed bitch been fuckin around on him for years and he takes it. We all know who he wishes he could slap. #CuckWill"

8 hours ago, iNow said:

....

"the burden of proof is with those eager to mock Krugman on this point.”

...

 

This shows that if you put your mind to it and use a certain rhetoric you can successfully attempt to prove that the fax maschine had the same impact on the global economy as the internet does.

19 hours ago, beecee said:

 

 

Of course all statements with regards to free speech are right and wise. As is koti's and many other examples. To me at least, it simply validates the fact that no amount of intention to be open and fair to free speech, actions, and philsophical standings, can ever be absolute, in every circumstance, on every occasion.  

I agree. Thats why we have laws and regulations which should provide an effective way of distinguishing between what is allowed and whats not. It is especially important in todays world where the internet of things has taken charge over most information which ends up at an end user. 

One useful piece of information that this thread gave us is the topic top posters who are most interested in this subject and are most eager to give their invaluable opinion on torture. Lets hear a round of applause for them and lock this thread.

2 hours ago, SergUpstart said:

The Ukrainian army uses the tactics of Middle Eastern extremists, hiding behind the civilian population as a human shield.

As RIA Novosti reports, retired Colonel Douglas McGregor, a former adviser to the head of the Pentagon, said this on Fox Business.

According to him, this tactic is explained by the fact that the APU lacks mobility, there are no air defense systems and air cover.

"They have to hide in settlements, mixing with the population. We could see similar things in the Middle East. When we defeated the Islamists there, they fled to the cities, used people, civilians, as human shields and tried to avoid destruction. This is exactly what is happening now in Ukraine, where the army is using the population to avoid defeat," McGregor stressed.

Considering that you still have access to American internet (posting on this site) you are not located in Russia, right?
If you are not in Russia, you have complete access to all information sources whenever you please hence you should be able to draw correct conclusions but... not necessarily:

"Change the perception of reality to such an extent that despite the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions"

Jurij Bezmienow
Ex KGB agent who defected to the US in 1970.

Google the guy, he has very interesting stories.
 

4 minutes ago, Genady said:

Thank you.

Who knows if these numbers are correct or not, probably nobody knows the exact numbers but its undeniable that Putin wasn’t expecting this scale of losses. 

As of March 5th LUKOIL stock dropped 92% and the board released the follwing statement on Saturday morning:

"The Board of Directors of LUKOIL expresses herewith its deepest concerns about the tragic events in Ukraine. Calling for the soonest termination of the armed conflict, we express our sincere empathy for all victims, who are affected by this tragedy. We strongly support a lasting ceasefire and a settlement of problems through serious negotiations and diplomacy"

They changed their attitude significantly and by significantly I mean 180 degrees, it looks like sanctions are working.

17 hours ago, Genady said:

Where are these numbers from?

Regular petrol in Warsaw went up from 5,88 PLN to 6,99 PLN in 48 hours. 

Ofcourse it's wise. Exactly as wise as banning child porn or Nazi propaganda.

43 minutes ago, iNow said:

I struggle with this question. Who decides what is or is not propaganda, and how do you prevent people from circumventing your ban? 

Maybe we can start by just shutting off Fox News? /rimshot

I think a body count is a good measure of deciding what is exempt from free speech.

9 hours ago, zapatos said:

Can you expand on that a bit? Maybe as social media is not a big part of my life I don't get the significance, but what exactly is the issue? Is it his looks? The fact he is not on Twitter? That he's not flashy enough? I'm truly curious as to how his age is a detriment due to social media.

Social media is almost never focused on merrit, data and fact, it's power comes from generating emotional responses. An 80 year old leader during a war is something easilly exploited. Putin essencially is at war with the US and the rest of the world, Ukraine is just a proxy.

9 hours ago, TheVat said:

Cool.  I will agree as far as Biden is not an inspiring orator.  And he stumbles verbally when he is tired, which 79 year old men can do.  I voted against Trump, and not for putting an elderly man into the world's most stressful and punishing job.  It is what it is, as we say here in these Ununited States.  Cory Booker or Amy Klobuchar wasn't an option, so I had to vote Joe.  He's holding up amazingly well.

 

Agree.

8 hours ago, swansont said:

He fights to overcome a stutter, which isn’t about energy.

True. I'm sure russian propaganda is exploiting that too.

7 hours ago, TheVat said:

Disagree with your Biden comments, however.  He has done a good job bringing the allies together on strong sanctions.  His work isn't flashy or dramatic, but it's quite competent.  

 

Don't get me wrong, he's a blessing compared to the orange man. I'm saying that his old age showing really hard isn't working well in todays social media driven world and especially when a war needs to be adressed. I wish he stopped trying to jog into pulpits before speaches in front of the camera, accept his age and use the remaining of his energy to speak  more coherently.

13 hours ago, MigL said:

On another note, if Belarus sends in troops to support the Russian invasion, does that give other countries 'wiggle room' to send in troops to supprt Ukrainian resistance ?

"Anonymous" published that Belarusan partisans set on fire the main control station at Baronivichi train station to prevent russian tanks and equipement from coming to Ukraine. I just spoke to Sergiej, a native russian friend of mine who builds expensive high end flashlights for a living. He's pissed at Putin beyond anything, his business (he sold mostly to the US to veterans, retired forces, police) is gone in an instant, he asked me for help to ship remaining pending orders from Poland somehow, I will help him if I can. He's thinking of packing up his lab into a truck and leaving but having a russain passport he's most likely to fail to leave. 

On another note, I'd like to share my thoughts on this nightmare as its unfolding. I remember Nancy Pelosi rubbing her hands instead of clapping while Biden was giving a speach, students waving hands in US colleges instead of clapping to prevent "trauma" to "sensitive" people, safe spaces, the whole thread here on the forum about JP, etc. I think that Putin was counting on facing the hand waving and safe space rhetoric people in the US and the EU when he was making a decision to attack Ukraine, fortunately he was very wrong. Biden looks like he's going to start to decompose any day now, purely from a PR point of view which is extremely important right now he's not doing a good job, Kamala Harris would be a better front person for the US right now. The good thing is that the world seems to be united, I’m seeing people who have extremely different stances starting to talk to each other and its a great thing pollitically at least here in Europe. China seeing whats happening will think more than twice before they put their hands on Taiwan. 

8 hours ago, SergUpstart said:

Why burn something that can be sold?

Because they would get court martial if it came out that they sold the fuel. Besides, who would they sell it to?

4 hours ago, iNow said:

US has banned all Russian flights from entering the country, and in parallel Boeing announced an end to all maintenance and flight assistance for Russian airlines. 

Putin is gone from the media probably sitting in one of his bunkers, I wonder if the oligarchs are talking with anyone in the US and the EU about a change of power in russia. The way these sanctions are going (severe and suprisingly united across the world) there are only two scenarios available, either Putin lives through this or he doesn’t.