“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.” --Alexander Solzhenitzyn
Piker is right...only if by "wage theft" you mean the theft of wages from 300,000,000 Americans by the local, state, and federal governments.
People pay extortionate income taxes, as well as sales taxes in many states, property taxes, and countless other taxes. Those trillions of dollar disappear into the insatiable maw of the State (at every level), only to be looted by corrupt politicians, corrupt bureaucrats, corrupt NGO officers, and millions of citizens (and ILLEGALS) who shamelessly steal from the taxpayers thru industrial-scale fraud.
I... I don't even have words for the nonsense I've just witnessed, really. Recently, Israel was added a UN sexual violence in war zones blacklist. And just, look at this. Listen to this video.
.... WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU DON'T NEED TO DO ANY VERIFICATION???? EXCUSE ME???
"The information is verified with a very robust methodology of verification and documentation. I am a recipient. I compile that information and I present it to the Secretary-General... [viewing the direct evidence] is not my job." (x)
^that is the audio from that twitter screenshot. God forbid a UN agent trust their own agency's verification process, especially since the report discusses the sexual violence in Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Libya, Mali, Myanmar, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, and Ukraine. So no, Israel was not uniquely targeted.
Do you believe it is normal to ask the person who compiles UN findings to doubt UN findings? To spend their time doing all the work other agents have already done? When the report verified 9,788 cases of conflict-related sexual violence during 2025?? (x)
If you wanted to review the evidence you wouldn't be screenshotting a tweet to complain about the unique ~antisemitism~ of a report that features the infamous Sde Teiman rape (caught on camera and widely distributed alongside the "right to rape" protests that followed and the Israeli government dropping the charges against the rapists). If you want to review UN methodology you can view that here, with the 2009 Gaza Conflict Commission used as a relevant example (this guide was published in 2015).
In fact, let's go over their methodology together:
Information-gathering methods of the United Nations Fact-finding
Mission on the Gaza Conflict (2009)
(a) The review of reports of international organizations, including the United Nations; reports and other documentation, including affidavits, produced by non-governmental and civil society organizations (Palestinian, Israeli and international); media reports; and writings of academics and analysts on the conflict;
(b) interviews with victims, witnesses and other persons having relevant information in keeping with established human rights methodology and in order to ensure both the safety and privacy of the interviewees and the integrity of the information provided, such interviews were conducted in private. The Mission decided not
to interview children. The Mission conducted 188 individual interviews. Most interviews were conducted in person. if the Mission was unable to meet the relevant persons, interviews were conducted by telephone. Also in keeping with normal practice for this type of report and to continue to protect their safety and privacy, the names of the victims, witnesses and other sources are generally not explicitly referred to in the report and codes are used instead. The names of individuals who publicly testified at the hearings held by the Mission or who have explicitly agreed to be named are, however, identified;
(c) Site visits to specific locations in Gaza where incidents had occurred. The Mission investigated 36 incidents in Gaza;
(d) The analysis of video and photographic images, including satellite imagery provided by UNOSAT, and expert analysis of such images;
(e) The review of medical reports about injuries to victims;
(f) The forensic analysis of weapons and ammunition remnants collected at incident sites;
(g) Meetings with a variety of interlocutors, including members of the diplomatic community, representatives of the parties concerned, NGOs, professional associations, military analysts, medical doctors, legal experts, scientists, United Nations staff;
(h) invitations, through notes verbales, to United Nations Members States and United Nations agencies, departments and bodies to provide information relating to the Mission’s investigation requirements;
(i) The wide circulation of a public call for written submissions from NGOs and other organizations and individuals interested in bringing information to the attention of the Mission. As a result, it received numerous submissions from organizations and individuals from israel, the Occupied Palestinian Territory and elsewhere in the world;
(j) Public hearings in Gaza and in Geneva to hear: (i) victims and witnesses of violations; and (ii) individuals with specialized knowledge and expertise on the context and impact of the hostilities.
I genuinely don't know what other criteria they might have missed for these investigations. Despite how Special Representative Pramila Patten says she would never herself visit a torture camp, the UN specifically calls for site visits and yet "Israel continues to deny visas for OHCHR international staff (x).
UN Human Rights High Commissioner Michelle Bachelet has deplored Israel’s refusal to grant visas for her staff in the occupied Palestinian t
^this article was published 2022.
Let's recap. You professionally misunderstood what Patten was saying and spread a lie that insinuated there was no fact-checking towards the sexual violence Palestinians experience. That is, full fucking stop, rape denial. And you did it to further the idea that the UN was unfairly "picking on" the Jewish State due to antisemitism, an extremely fucking annoying statement considering how stupidly easy it is to fact-check the original tweet. Hell, you don't even have to do that. You can just correctly understand "it's not the responsibility of my office to do any verification" implies a different office verifies the information.
You lied about antisemitism to protect Israel from criticism. Please stop fucking doing that.
I didn't lie about antisemitism. If the person compiling the information does not take it upon themselves to review that information, and in fact openly announces they would not even go to one of these facilities even if offered, how exactly does that not prove bias?
You've got a whole wall of text here trying to argue that we should trust information the person presenting that information to the secretary general and ARGUING THAT THEY SHOULD BE ON THE BLACKLIST did not even bother to review themselves. And frankly, I don't give a fuck about any of it. Cuz she should fucking review the information, not openly announce she wouldn't review it to check that it's factual even if she was offered the chance to go to an Israeli detention center and verify it in person.
Oh, and your tags? No one said "compassion for rape victims is antisemitic." What we said is that not even trying to verify that a rape actually happened before presenting it in an argument that Israel should be blacklisted for using sexual violence is what's antisemitic.
The information. Was verified. Asking her to doubt the verification process of the UN, her own agency, is stupid. Like you are either incredibly stupid or deliberately and maliciously creating this argument knowing it's stupid but wanting to discredit the UN anyways.
Yes I think it's unreasonable for this woman to personally verify 9,788 cases of sexual violence. As any sane person would agree.
Was it? And we should trust that it was actually verified... Why, exactly? And especially when in charge of compiling the information did not bother to lay eyes on it?
And I don't need to discredit the UN, they do that themselves. 🤣 I mean, 1500 of their unrwa workers are suspected of having Hamas ties. Not to mention the long history of their workers soliciting sex from women in the areas they're supposed to be helping.
And actually, it's pretty fucking reasonable to expect someone whose entire job is compiling information to actually review said information. Especially when trying to blacklist a country for claims of sexual violence, AND ESPECIALLY when the claims about that violence are SO BULLSHIT there are people claiming they were raped by DOGS.
Oh she reviewed the information! Just not the direct evidence. Do you need me to explain the difference?
A US probe into Hamas "ties" of people living in Gaza, where Hamas is the fucking government, is stupid. Ohhh links to the government as an aid organization? You don't say.
Tbh "they're saying they're raped by dogs obviously that's fake" as if Israel doesn't have a long history of using dogs to abuse Palestinians? As if a man with fucking down syndrome wasn't murdered by a fucking IDF dog (and I don't mean the soldier)
Muhammed Bhar's family wants the Israeli military to investigate his death in Gaza City this month.
I think "Man with down syndrome murdered by army police dog" is gorish enough to believe rapists use animals for sexual violence. Maybe you have different standards
1) someone who doesn't review the evidence is not someone who should be arguing to put Israel on the blacklist.
2) Hamas is also a designated terrorist organization. Being the government is irrelevant. If you, as an aid worker, have ties to terrorists that is a big fucking deal. Especially when they're currently doing what Hamas has been doing.
3) did you see the part of that incident where the dog attack was accidental and the soldiers only "left him to die" because they were currently under fire and chose to protect idf soldiers over one man? I'm suspecting you didn't. That or you dismissed that part as propaganda.
I also fail to see how this incident lends any credibility to the idea the idf is using dogs to rape people. Nevermind how impossible it is to actually train a dog to do that. Dogs are notoriously hard to train to breed with each other on command, and it's really not physically possible for a dog to penetrate a human without help, their genitalia is not built like ours. It's designed for a willing recipient (in whatever sense that means for dogs), meaning very little resistance to penetration. Which means it's not really built to penetrate either human "hole."
4) you calling me a Nazi in the tags is just the cherry on top to all this. 🤣
Do. Do you think Pramila Patten as an individual is the one who decides what goes on this report. Are you that dense.
Hamas is only a designated terror organization if you're a white bitch. There's nothing "official" about Hamas' designation, it's literally western and western-aligned countries that designate them as such. The UN does not designate them a terrorist org. Probably because they're resisting people objectively worse than anything they could do. Any time you cling to Hamas as an "official designated terrorist org" you're just kinda doing western/American imperialism for them. How many genocides does the US have under its belt again? And I'm supposed to recognize its authority here? Lol.
I'm sorry that's INSANE spin of that story. Soldiers use dogs to physically threaten people -> dog attacks people. Soldiers: 😢 we had no idea that would happen.
You are a fucking nazi. You're an ethnosupremacist rape-denying nazi.
She doesn't need to "decide what goes on it" she just needs to fucking read it. To review the evidence. So it doesn't fucking matter if she's the one who "decides what goes on it" or not. She is the one presenting the information as a reason Israel should be on the blacklist. If she's not willing to review it first to fact-check it, why should we trust her?
"if you're a white bitch." I myself am Latina, I know several black people, other latinos, ethnic Jews and countless others who aren't white who fully believe them to be terrorists. So no, you're full of shit. 🤣
"resisting people objectively worse" is provably untrue, but also targetting civilians for murder, rape and kidnapping is not resistance. There is no law that permits any of those acts against civilians in the name of any cause, let alone "armed resistance."
The fact you are trying to argue Hamas are not terrorists is all anyone needs to see to know how fucking retarded you are.
And buddy, this specific case was an accident. This is literally a proven fact.
And I'm not a Nazi, nor an ethno-supremacist and I have seen no solid evidence whatsoever these rapes occurred, let alone ones committed by fucking dogs. Hearsay is not proof. "Activists" from the flotilla who claimed to have collapsed lungs yet were talking days after this supposed injury with no sign of any injury on their body is not proof of rape either. Especially when they were CAUGHT ON CAMERA faking being in a hospital bed in Turkey (after leaving on camera in Israel looking fine, all fist pumps and peace signs) then 12 hours later in Spain were looking fine and dandy.
Find me solid proof of a rape occuring, and I'd be the first to condemn the rapists. But so far, I have seen nothing solid at all.
They don't even have to believe it's true (though given how anti-semitic and Pro-Pali Terrorist they are, they probably do). They'll make the claim, and cite the utterly untrustworthy UN report just to try to make Israel look bad. So there's no argument that will move them.
You cannot rationally argue someone out of a position that they did not arrive at rationally.
My instinct is to agree with this, but like, when I really think about it…
No money, no credit cards, identification is all vocal/fingerprints/retinal, so no wallet.
Again, doors are voice activated, or just unlocked by entering a code. No keys.
Communication devices are tiny and stick onto clothing starting in Next Gen. TOS had bulkier communication that they carried around or kept in, like, packs and stuff, so the arguments for pockets is a little more valid, and if I remember correctly, those costumes did have pockets, tho I could be wrong about that. But anything post TNG, the point is moot anyway.
Tricorders and phasers are really the only thing anyone’s carrying around, and that’s usually on away missions where they’d be bring their packs/holsters or just have them out. I mean, who wants to stick a phaser in their pocket?
So, yeah. There’s not much little stuff people need to carry around everywhere. And if they are preparing for a longer journey or want to bring bulkier things, well…just bring a bag. It fits more anyway.
Every time a member of the USS Enterprise has found a cool rock and taken it home, it has resulted in eleven deaths, six temporal displacements, the holodecks breaking again, and somebody getting turned into a lizard. Pockets are a privilege, not a right.
The lack of pockets is a serious problem, yes. But not the biggest one.
The LEAST realistic thing about Star Trek uniforms is that uniforms must be approved by the brass before being implemented throughout the service. The pant and tunic uniform makes it impossible to hide a belly. From middle-aged spread to actual potbellies...there is NO upper-ranked man in Star Fleet who would EVER approve a uniform which is so unflattering to anyone not in excellent shape.
Slippery slope though - who decides who is 'mentally ill'? Mental illness is an ever changing, ever inclusive catch-all for any/all behaviors and thoughts that They arbitrarily decide aren't "normal".
And 'normal' is defined by the Majority.
And the majority of ppl are mindless, spineless, low IQ, t0LeRaNt, herd compliers.
Anything They can possibly redefine or re-label to put you on prescriptions for is a Mental Illness now:
Your bff/sibling/family member died and you're too sad to go to work for a couple days? You're 'clinically depressed' - get on some pharma drugs.
Kid too smart and bored with classes dragging for the stupid ones? Or kid's not a fat lazy slug? Kidd is ADD or ADHD - get the kid on pharma drugs.
Pissed off that some a-hole broke into your home, trashed it, killed your pets, stole your property, slashed your tires, hurt your family? You have 'anger issues' - get on some pharma drugs.
Don't want health destroying rando vaxxes? Won't eat fake meat and bugs? Think elections are predetermined? Refuse to tolerate your kids, wife, gf, pets and livestock being raped by 3rd world shitbags? You're paranoid - Mentally ill - get on some court ordered pharma drugs, now you have to hand over all weapons ... maybe have a long stay in a 're-education' camp.
See how that works??
Y'all need to think this shit through. Y'all need to consider setting a precedent when your "side" is in power - what the other side is going to do with that power when the tables are turned.
Doesn't anyone have the ability to think past a headline or meme bait phrase anymore? ffs.
Are you repeatedly assaulting (screaming, shouting and verbally abusing) or hitting, kicking, stabbing or shooting people? I don't give a damn if you're "mentally ill" or just a violent asshole, I want you locked up so you can't hurt anyone else.
Are you camping on public spaces? Drinking or doing drugs in public spaces? Shitting and pissing on public spaces? Otherwise turning public spaces into a dangerous, unpleasant gauntlet everyone else must negotiate to go about their day unmolested? You should be locked up.
Tolerating such behavior is a choice. Specifically, a choice that leftist politicians, DAs and prosecutors are making with malice aforethought and imposing on the public.
Refusing to tolerate it is also a choice, and one we can choose to make.
This would make Donald Trump's face the symbol of unethical, clandestine financial transactions. A bundle of Trumps would replace Benjamins as the favored currency of bribes and criminal cartels, being 2.5x as space efficient.
It also appropriately represents inflation, as such a bill would be pointless if the value of the USD had not fallen so dramatically on his watch. Granted, Biden kept it going between his insane spending sprees.
A $250 bill would, indeed, be a boon for cash transactions and financial privacy. It'll never happen--we USED TO have $500 and $1,000 bills, but the feds discontinued them to make it more difficult to move large amounts of cash without it being bulky.
That the value of the dollar has "fallen significantly" on Trump's watch is absolute bullshit. Biden, and Obama before him, produced far more inflation than Trump has--and fucked up our economy as well. But inflation has been government policy since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. Inflation doesn't just happen; it's the result of printing money with no value to back it.
But in any case, I'm fairly sure that a living person can't be depicted on US currency, just like they can't be on a stamp. So the point is moot.
Yes. But the only people with the power to expel them are their fellow Congress critters, most if not all of whom, are just as corrupt. So it's not going to happen.
They COULD be arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned for embezzlement, I suppose, but that would require that the DOJ actually, you know, do something useful to the public. So...not likely either.
"Why should anyone profit off of food?" seems like a strange question to beg. The answer seems clear to me: So that those involved in distributing it can buy their own, to begin with. Or are wages already factored in when calculating profit?
Because to a certain mindset, "profit" means "steal and extort for no reason when they could give it away for free"
Because to a certain mindset, being in business and earning a profit is as indefensible at as armed robbery--and arguably worse, because those some imbeciles will turn themselves inside out to justify crime as the responsibility, the fault, of everyone BUT the robber himself.
For leftists, WHAT you've done only matters IF you're not a leftist in good standing. Leftists can do no wrong...at least until the scandal threatens leftist power, and then you're disposable (like any member of a criminal conspiracy who becomes a liability to his masters).
Platner is rapidly approaching that point but has not (as of this writing) quite reached it yet.
