Jump to content

bolverk

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    15726
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by bolverk

  1. Lol indeed. Instead, it should read territories illegally occupied by Israel.
  2. I haven't seen it since it came out. At the time, I favored '28 Days' over 'Weeks' because it just didn't have the same je-ne-sais-quoi of "reality" that the first had. I did a rewatch of 'Days' recently and plan to do the same with 'Weeks' soon before going off to see 'Years.' Looks like it's available on Hulu.
  3. Sure, why not? It's a rockin' song. Got me a movie, I want you to know Slicing up eyeballs, I want you to know Girlie so groovy, I want you to know Don't know about you, but I am un Chien Andalusia, I am un Chien Andalusia, I am un Chien Andalusia, I am un Chien Andalusia, wanna grow up to be Be a debaser
  4. https://www.irishcentral.com/news/ireland-ban-trade-israeli-occupied-territories
  5. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz9knl5w529o Three Palestinians have been shot dead after dozens of Israeli settlers attacked a Palestinian village in the occupied West Bank, Palestinian authorities say. Video footage from Kafr Malik, near Ramallah, on Wednesday night showed a car and a home on fire and Palestinians running away as gunfire is heard. The Israeli military said forces deployed to the scene found settlers and villagers throwing stones at each other. It added that several "terrorists" opened fire and threw stones at the forces, who returned fire and identified hits. They also arrested five Israelis. The Palestinian foreign ministry said settlers fired at villagers in their homes during what it called their "terrorist assault". The ministry also said Israeli forces prevented ambulance crews from reaching the wounded and obstructed fire crews from entering the village for several hours. Another villager, a 13-year-old boy, was shot dead - reportedly by Israeli troops - earlier in the week. Israel has built about 160 settlements housing some 700,000 Jews since it occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem - land Palestinians want, along with Gaza, for a hoped-for future state - in the 1967 Middle East war. An estimated 3.3 million Palestinians live alongside them. The vast majority of the international community considers the settlements illegal under international law - a position supported by an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) last year - although Israel disputes this. "What do you expect us to do when our homes are being attacked by settlers with petrol bombs?" asked one elderly man, sitting quietly with hundreds of other mourners on Thursday after the funerals of the three men who were killed. cont'd
  6. And just because I watched this over the weekend
  7. Meanwhile, in Gaza, the carnage continues. Israel is weaponizing food delivery, drawing in desperate people into dire situations and ending up killing a bunch of them. More Palestinians have died during the 12-day conflict between Israel/US and Iran, than among the three war combatants. The University of London estimates that the death toll for the war is 39-90% higher than the 58,000 that the Gazan Ministry of Health has counted. https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/2025/06/26/as-all-eyes-are-on-iran-the-horror-in-gaza-persists Israel might have stayed its bombardment of Iran, but the horror in Gaza continues. More Palestinians were killed in Gaza, according to the health ministry there, during Israel’s 12-day war in Iran than in that conflict. The widespread destruction of buildings of the early months of the war (around 60% have been affected) has slowed dramatically, but deaths have not (see charts). Whereas people were once killed in air strikes, the violence is now concentrated around the four new aid hubs that Israel has set up. Initially the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), which runs the hubs, blamed the violence on teething problems. But the deaths linked to aid distribution have soared in the month since its launch. The UN says 410 Palestinians have been killed seeking food en route to the GHF’s centres. On June 24th at least 40 Palestinians were killed seeking aid in central and southern Gaza. Accounts differ. Doctors treating the wounded say the shrapnel matches Israeli artillery shells. Palestinians fleeing say Israeli tanks opened fire. Safe Reach Solutions, an American firm providing GHF’s security, says many of the incidents occur far beyond their perimeter fences and that no one within them has been hurt. Verifying any of these claims is difficult since Israel still does not allow foreign journalists into Gaza unsupervised. “We’re dealing with a starving population,” says a security contractor. “There’s no peaceful way of doing it right now.” Still the hungry keep coming. “The choice is between dying seeking food or starving to death,” says Ahmed Masri, whose son, Abed, was shot in the leg in an attack on June 14th while collecting food. It might help if Israel let in more food. The GHF says it has distributed 42m meals since its launch, less than one a day for every Palestinian, assuming women, children and elderly could all get it. And the foundation admits they cannot. Israel has sharply reduced aid flows via the UN and other humanitarian groups. Even the GHF is starting to fret about Israeli access restrictions. It plans 20 centres but Israel has yet to let it expand beyond the four pilots. Other vital supplies are running out. The GHF does not distribute water or medicine. Desalination and sewage-treatment plants, water pipes and hospitals have been destroyed. Abed’s father took him to three field hospitals after he was shot. All turned him away because they had no medicine to give him. Israel might have stayed its bombardment of Iran, but the horror in Gaza continues. More Palestinians were killed in Gaza, according to the health ministry there, during Israel’s 12-day war in Iran than in that conflict. The widespread destruction of buildings of the early months of the war (around 60% have been affected) has slowed dramatically, but deaths have not (see charts). Whereas people were once killed in air strikes, the violence is now concentrated around the four new aid hubs that Israel has set up. Deaths from disease, starvation and the lack of medicine are worsening the toll. Researchers at Royal Holloway, University of London and others say that by January 2025 8,500 people had died of war-related but non-violent causes since the conflict’s start. Based on interviews that month and a sample of nearly 10,000 people, they estimated that the death toll from traumatic injuries was 39-90% higher than that published by Gaza’s ministry of health, decried by Israel as a Hamas mouthpiece. Observers struggle to see a military rationale for weaponising food, water and medicine other than squeezing Palestinians into ever tinier slices of Gaza. Meanwhile, on the ground Israel still encounters resistance. Seven soldiers were killed when their armoured vehicle caught fire on June 24th. A military spokesman blamed explosives. Hopes for a ceasefire rest on the possibility that having helped Binyamin Netanyahu, Israeli’s prime minister, with his mission in Iran, Donald Trump will force him to accept a deal in Gaza.
  8. Fuck off with that bullshit. Multiple articles have already been linked here stating that the site suffered severe damage. I know that I've posted at least a couple that have said the same thing. Not a single soul has denied or disputed that. There have been in-depth discussions, specifically speculating whether the delicate centrifuges could have survived the blast, depending on how they were stored and packed, or if they were just left in place or moved off-site. Do not confuse mocking premature celebrations of total OBLITERATION by the rah-rah-rah clownshitshow brigade with being happy that Iran might still retain the capacity to make a bomb. No one here wants that.
  9. Gawd, that pisses me off. You so much as question a single bomb that gets dropped on Muslim children in Gaza, and you’re immediately labeled an antisemite while this kind of overt Islamophobia, which encourages you to feel good about bombing little brown kids, is shouted from the rooftops.
  10. The guys who killed Bin Laden might dispute that claim.
  11. Wordle 1,468 5/6 ⬛⬛⬛⬛🟨 ⬛⬛⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟨⬛🟩🟩 🟩⬛⬛🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Connections Puzzle #746 🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟨🟨🟨🟨 🟪🟪🟪🟪 🟦🟦🟦🟦 🙂 Daily Quordle 1249 4️⃣7️⃣ 6️⃣5️⃣ m-w.com/games/quordle/ 🟩⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟨⬜⬜⬜🟨 ⬜🟩⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜🟨 ⬜🟨🟨🟨⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟨⬜🟨⬜⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ ⬜🟨⬜⬜⬜ ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬜⬜🟩⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜🟨🟨🟨 ⬜🟩⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜🟨⬜🟩 ⬜⬜🟨⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 ⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
  12. I just binged them tonight and really enjoy the show. Characters are well-written (Riri & Natalie are great together), the acting is good, and the story is compelling. Great music, too. Kinda of a hip-hop spy vibe sound throughout.
  13. I didn't read this in TFG's voice for once. Instead, it was that guy from SNL reading this as a monologue. Somebody quick! Go grab him from wherever he's vacationing and drag his into the studio to tape this now.
  14. Right. You still need a foil, an opponent, someone to hate, etc. So, you've got to be interesting to gain attention, and then you define yourself by identifying your enemy, and I think psychologically it's a lot easier for folks to hate the weak, disadvantaged, or different. So, what the GQP does is build up these groups as some supposed threat to the status quo and give permission to punch down and feel good about hating these groups. The Dems have a more difficult challenge: empowering people to "punch up" against those who hold the advantage. While these opponents are widely distrusted (and occasionally hated), you've got to inspire folks to muster up the courage to actually stand up to the powerful, and I think most people aren't really comfortable with that. It requires putting yourself and what you have on the line. There's risk. Hating the weak, and acting on that weak doesn't require shit, especially if a permission structure is in place that allows people to act on that bully impulse. And, as has been frequently stated, Trump has almost single-handedly permitted Americans to be their worst selves. So, for us progressives, liberals, moderates, and even right-of-center, old-school conservatives (never Trumpers), it's going to take a singular personality who can draw eyes, grab attention, and encourage people to stand up to the powerful and fight back. And that person is going to be immediately recognized as a threat and labelled by the media as a radical revolutionary who could topple the social and economic order, which is going to make a lot of folks a bit uncomfortable. But I am convinced that's what it's going to take. Fire up the folks to fight back. Fuck the labels Fuck the billionaires Fuck the fascists Fuck the fear Fight
  15. The "be interesting" part of that is what @Bozo_Casanova has argued recently, stating that it's more important than the actual policies.
  16. Username toootally checks out.
  17. Sure, fine, no problem with that. I'd just like to hear from his critics, who say they'll abandon the party because of people like him, what the actual fuck is wrong with this Mamedi character. What has he said or proposed that tweeks folks so much?
  18. So, I'll assume your concern is about optics, perception, and/or the label, because you just said it's not about proposed policies or anything else. It's simply that the socialism "brand" turns you off, and you presume you feel like you're speaking for a bloc of moderates who'll sit out the elections because of that label scaring them (and you) off. Does the same kind of toxicity that affects the socialism brand that you say will poison the Democrats' chances of winning back either branch of Congress (even though the vast majority of its candidates aren't) extend to Republicans when the head of their party is called a racist, authoritarian, dictator, or fascist and just about the entire political party unquestioningly follows his lead? I mean, we're not yet six months into this presidency, and it's pretty hard NOT to label them that based on everything that's happened. So, you're conundrum is that you can't be motivated to vote against actual, real, honest-to-god fascism where people (even US citizens) are being kidnapped by masked goons sending people to foreign gulags without due process and the regime is ignoring court orders while also giving away every bit of our personal private data to a Elon or Palantir because you're so turned off by the label of "socialism," even though the majority of Democratic candidates aren't actual socialists but really just want equality, environmental protections, and better healthcare and education for Americans. Is that really your stance?
  19. Pretend I don't know anything about the guy, which ain't that far from the truth. I haven't followed the primary at all beyond what I've read over the last week in this thread and the Democratic Party one. Yes, I subscribe to the NYTimes, but I skim past those articles for national and international news, and I don't watch teevee news. It's a local election, albeit for a very big and very important American city. In fact, I can't even rightly recall the winner's name right at this moment unless I went to go look it up. It's Mamedi or something. So, I'm pretty much a clean slate. So, how socialist is this guy? Is he proposing that the city government take over Wall Street or something? Like, seriously, how radical is he? What turns you off so much about him specifically? You seem pretty upset by his election, and you obviously are very strongly opposed to it. If you're trying to sway my or anyone else's opinion about how he's a radical departure from the mainstream and will drag the rest of the Democratic Party down with him, you have the floor and I'm listening.
  20. She lost because turnout was down among left-leaning and progressive groups.
  21. The Bombing of Iran May Teach an Unwelcome Lesson on Nuclear Weapons Will America’s pre-emptive strike discourage other countries from pursuing a weapon — or just the opposite? It has been nearly two decades since any country elbowed its way into the club of nuclear-armed nations. President Trump, with his bombing of three Iranian nuclear installations last weekend, has vowed to keep the door shut. Whether Mr. Trump’s pre-emptive strike will succeed in doing that is hard to predict, so soon after the attack and the fragile cease-fire that has followed. But already it is stirring fears that Iran, and other countries, will draw a very different conclusion than the one the White House intended: that having a bomb is the only protection in a threatening world. The last country to get one, North Korea, has never faced such an attack. After years of defying demands to dismantle its nuclear program, it is now viewed as largely impregnable. Mr. Trump exchanged friendly letters with its dictator, Kim Jong-un, and met him twice in a fruitless effort to negotiate a deal. In Iran’s case, Mr. Trump deployed B-2 bombers just weeks after making a fresh diplomatic overture to its leaders. “The risks of Iran acquiring a small nuclear arsenal are now higher than they were before the events of last week,” said Robert J. Einhorn, an arms control expert who negotiated with Iran during the Obama administration. “We can assume there are a number of hard-liners who are arguing that they should cross that nuclear threshold.” Iran would face formidable hurdles to producing a bomb even if it made a concerted dash for one, Mr. Einhorn said, not least the knowledge that if the United States and Israel detect such a move, they will strike again. It is far from clear that Iran’s leaders, isolated, weakened and in disarray, want to provoke them. Yet the logic of proliferation looms large in a world where the nuclear-armed great powers — the United States, Russia and China — are viewed as increasingly unreliable and even predatory toward their neighbors. From the Persian Gulf and Central Europe to East Asia, analysts said, nonnuclear countries are watching Iran’s plight and calculating lessons they should learn from it. “Certainly, North Korea doesn’t rue the day it acquired nuclear weapons,” said Christopher R. Hill, who led lengthy, ultimately unsuccessful, talks with Pyongyang in 2007 and 2008 to try to persuade it to dismantle its nuclear program. The lure of the bomb, Mr. Hill said, has become stronger for America’s allies in the Middle East and Asia. Since World War II, they have sheltered under an American security umbrella. But they now confront a president, in Mr. Trump, who views alliances as incompatible with his vision of “America First.” “I’d be very careful with the assumption that there is a U.S. nuclear umbrella,” said Mr. Hill, who served as ambassador to South Korea, Iraq, Poland, and Serbia under Democratic and Republican presidents. “Countries like Japan and South Korea are wondering whether they can rely on the U.S.”
  22. And, yet, they were compliant when a deal was in place. But now that Bibi has revealed his hand that regime change was his intent with Operation Rising Lion, the Iranian regime now knows their days are numbered if they don't get the bomb.
×
×
  • Create New...