![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/c47230a8-134c-4dc9-89e8-75c6ea875d36.png)
Ah, an excuse to attack an organisation that worships something other than Mighty Xi and the CCP.
Using children as the pawns too. Masterful.
Some middle-aged guy on the Internet. Seen a lot of it, occasionally regurgitates it, trying to be amusing and informative.
Lurked Digg until v4. Commented on Reddit (same username) until it went full Musk.
Is on kbin.social but created this profile on kbin.run during a week-long outage.
Other Adjectives: Neurodivergent; Nerd; Broken; British; Ally; Leftish
Ah, an excuse to attack an organisation that worships something other than Mighty Xi and the CCP.
Using children as the pawns too. Masterful.
The real punishment ought to be an atomic wedgie. For everyone who was a C-level for more than a month at that company in the last 10 years.
This ought to be the punishment for a lot of unethical business practices. You can’t delegate that to a customer’s wallet.
If we tried this in the UK with someone like, say, the late David Coleman, I’m not entirely sure anyone who remembers him would be able to distinguish - other than, as I said, the knowledge that he’s been gone for quite some time now.
Coleman, was considered a go-to commentator for decades despite being gaffe-prone even at the best of times. He was occasionally oblivious and apparently lacking any self-awareness too. (He did kind of learn to laugh at himself though and was a good, well, sport, about it all.)
Sounds very AI to me. Come to think of it, he may even have been kept around precisely because of the entertainment value.
I assume that Al Michaels is not of this bizarre calibre and it wouldn’t take long for people to notice.
He won’t stop until every last potential Hamas member (read “Palestinian”) is dead or out of Palestine.
He’s been pretty clear on this.
Maybe not in any legal sense, no. How people and even news media use it, there’s plenty of wiggle room.
e.g. allowing the ambiguity of “British home owner” to go unclarified, that is as “home owner who is British” as opposed to “owner of a home in Britain”, and any similarly loose interpretations that go along with or derive from that.
Of all the comments to argue against the use of a mysterious “they”, I think you’ve picked the wrong one.
It’s pretty clear who the “they” is here: Conservative politicians in the pocket of corporations who would stand to lose from cheaper, cleaner energy sources.
I’d go one step further and erase “Conservative”, because it doesn’t matter your other politics if you’re receiving bribes lobbying money from big business. It does at least seem to be skewed more towards politicians in Conservative parties though.
Headline in three months: “Less work getting done than in five-day week.”
Government and management will blame lazy workers. Workers will blame government, management and burnout. Truth will be closer to the latter, but a few actually lazy employees and some innocent scapegoats will be fired to preserve the bottom line. Burnout will increase.
But at least the bosses got their bonus this month.
Better hope the IDF don’t find out there’s a humanitarian zone at Netanyahu’s house.
Pity the person of Scottish (or Welsh) ancestry born in England who has to choose what they are on some forms, especially legal ones.
But then, there are worse problems to have.
“Briton” is generally used as the noun form of “British”, so when “Brit” is used as a noun - which is most of the time - it’s abbreviating “Briton”.
As for who gets to be called “Briton”: In the loosest sense, anyone with residence in Britain can be counted as British when they’re here, whether or not they’re considered ethnically British (by themselves or others).
Bear in mind that “Briton” originally mean “an inhabitant of the British Isles before any of the Romans, or various flavours of Germanics turned up”. There’s been quite a bit of admixture since then. It makes sense - to the chagrin of the Welsh, no doubt - that the term has mutated a bit over the centuries.
What sort of comedian is he? I feel like satirists and absurdists are good choices for political office.
Those who punch down, maybe not so much.
That’s called “time to get a new job.”
Before I came in here, I assumed that’s what “or else” meant, and I’m still not sure it doesn’t mean that.
There’s something troubling about his eyes. Every photo I see just screams “danger”.
Yes, this is entirely subjective. I’m sure he’s very nice to his pets, etc.
Asking him to auto-cannibalise? I like it.
NK’s narrative is that SK is separate from the one true Korea because it’s occupied by, or at least heavily influenced by, the US. That means that if Russia were to, say, declare war on the US - however unlikely that might be - NK would theoretically be in favour.
Kim would almost certainly be interested in finally getting to lob a couple of bombs at an actual target.
Less seriously(?), you could also argue that Putin’s pining for the glory days of the USSR with its empty stores and downtrodden, starving citizens fits right in with what’s going on in NK, so perhaps Kim had better watch his back lest he become the former dictator of a new SSR.
They used a current world event as an excuse for an atrocity that they might well have found a different excuse for otherwise.
They could have chosen any Jewish person and any “punishment” but they chose her, and that “punishment”. That’s because they wanted to mete out that “punishment” in particular. They’re disgusting.
And yes, that’s true of neo-Nazi violence too. The violent ones are usually nutters spoiling for a fight, or worse. The prejudices they hold are merely their excuse for it.
One downside to this is that $10 is worth more to one person than it is to another, and I can’t see how that can be fixed.
There are plenty of stupid and/or devious people who will see what’s going on in some part of the world and believe a narrative or use that narrative as an excuse for their own ends.
If it wasn’t her, it would have been someone else. The whole human race has a problem with human garbage who can’t control their actions. Some of them end up running countries and turning a blind eye to war atrocities, if not asking for them outright.
This doesn’t lessen what happened to this 12-year-old victim, and it doesn’t lessen what’s happening elsewhere in the world, nor the ramifications. My point is that the link, while there, is tenuous.
The perpetrators are human garbage who found a reason to stop pretending not to be, and now should be treated as such.
Kim inherited his mess. Putin made his own.
That’s not to say that Kim isn’t allowing things to continue mostly as they were, but it could be beyond his ability to change things even if he wanted to.
Putin, on the other hand, only needs to call off the “special military exercise” and most of his immediate problems will go away.
Talk about a quote that can be read both ways.