Yeah, that’s a fair point, honestly.

I feel you, it’s for sure gray.

I get what you’re saying, but my point is it’s not really accepted. It’s actually an incredibly controversial process that has recently been updated in the US to include not targeting civilians specifically.

Totally respect it’s not your idea, I’m just pointing out that I think it’s much more complicated when you involve civilian collateral damage, which is actually terrorism in a mask with an overcoat.

People are pretty universal in their condemnation of American attacks that kill civilians, that’s why we see the names of those people less, Trump made that change. Biden rolled back those changes finally, but you’re not gonna believe some of the new rules, stuff like stop fucking drone striking civilians you sociopaths: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/01/us/biden-drone-strikes.html

So yeah, America is both complicit in and has been (maybe still is) a sponsor of terror in many situations. And if one of those people affected by America in that way were to somehow get a bunch of cell phone bombs on GI’s hips while they were out with their families, to those people it might be justified while I would still call it terrorism.

You know, I bet they have a problem with both! Shooting a rocket at a market is comparable to putting explosives on a possible combatant and detonating it while they are in a market. Let alone 3,000x that latter scenario.

Like I don’t care for terroristic acts on civilians no matter where they come from. I’m unironically ok with them mass targeting the rocket sites, though!

There’s been a retail explosion with the thca loophole through the 2018 farm bill. It’s really only picked up the last couple of years with both price plummeting and access skyrocketing this year.

Technical legality has meant many of these sellers are using regular billing systems (Card payments, not cash only) are shipping via usps, and using square space to build retail sites.

They’ll know this is as least partially part of the cause is they numbers go up once congress closes the farm bill loophole.

Really? The advice I’ve seen for years at a traffic stop is to only roll down your window enough to talk to the officer and hand over paperwork and to close it immediately after. Along with not voluntarily providing any extra information and only answering questions as asked.

That’s for your safety, not theirs. You can argue the full tints, but the vehicle was surrounded by officers and many of them were aware this person was playing football that day.

In context this is one of stupidest escalations I’ve seen since ever and I can’t believe none of these other cops stopped it from happening. Give this a little more time and the rest of the guys are gonna get lit up along with the dude who’s on administrative leave.

Like in order to make this shit look ok, you have to full on compare the reaction to someone who was engaged in a crash or hit and run, has a warrant, or is a sovcit. They could run this dudes plates in 7 seconds and understand this dude wasnt a threat, they probably should have escorted him the rest of the way after they gave him his citation! This was a physical response to disrespect, ridiculousintimidation and you shouldn’t be ok with it.

Sov Cits don’t have documentation and refuse to comply with lawful orders. This gentleman gave the police his documentation and they got mad he wasn’t bending over and spreading his asshole.

It’s funny cause this situation is so crazy with how the cops escalated this situation when it wasn’t warranted, you actually have to compare them to someone doing an actual crime!

Like that’s how crazy this debate even is. Rich dude in super car being an asshole vs a person who is willfully driving with fake paperwork hoping a cop pulls them over.

Hill just looked like a rich asshole in a hurry and I can’t imagine anyone advocating that the police action was OK.

I really can’t imagine thinking that no matter how disrespectful someone was during a traffic violation, that escalating to pulling someone out of the car and putting them in handcuffs is ok.

Office was never in any danger, he was actually surrounded by other officers. You should be able to disrespect an officer and that should not escalate being physically handled like that.

The expectation for a criminal in a criminal act is to have as much force as needed applied to them to get them to comply. The expectation of an asshole at a traffic stop should be to get his big ticket and keep moving.

If you don’t want to be called a boot licker, stop licking boots!

I dunno, I’m way less terrified of the guy with a 40k watch in a 150k car than I would be in any other situation. Unless I was super jealous that this black dude was rich, and he didn’t show immediate respect to me. Then I might pull him out of his car despite having everything I need to write the citation and being in 0 danger literally surrounded by other officers.

Dude, absofuckinglutely. Robert’s was never not on Trump’s side, he just bided his time until the right decisions came through, like the one that makes the president a de-facto kingship based in court opinions with a huge amount of freshly minted psychos as judges.

Bold of you to assume this person has friends!

No, they do, human trafficking is especially bad in wealthy middle Eastern countries where indentured servants are regularly abused, raped, killed.

India in particular is having a huge increases in violence against women that doubled over the last decade, that not specific to rural areas at all.

What about all that shit that was and it’s happening to Iranian women and girls, getting brutally raped and killed by the police.

Pretty common actually.

Unlikely, yes. More likely an implementation of principles in ways we just don’t have reference for in documentation, we just discovered that Roman concrete was mixed hot with quick lime. This shit always seems crazy until we figure it out.

Although I don’t see anyone saying there were as low as 1,600 workers on the great pyramid. So you right to question that one.

Actually I bet this is where that number came from lol:

https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna46485163

I’m not even sure where you’ve developed that strawman from what the dude said, his original statement or his future back and forth with you. He said that the brute force argument isn’t the best one based on research like the water experimentation on dry sand. That doesn’t mean they didn’t use brute force in labor, just that it may have been supplemented by techniques we’re still investigating. He’s not saying they used magic.

Now we know they not only had a easy source of water, we know they had enough water to supplement the power of human labor. You just really wanted to argue so you focused on whatever points you could find disagreement.

The whole argument is based on you really wanting to be unequivocally right about your understanding of how something was built when the article you posted is about a literal groundbreaking discovery that may change our understanding of how it was built. Just seems silly on this one I guess.

Yeah, if that’s your take away I guess posting a pictograph and saying “nuh uh” being the crux of your argument on a body of study who’s modern history goes back to sprinkling mummy dust on your breakfast makes perfect sense.

Keep up this good!

I think you might be one of those expert on everything types, it works really well with political garbage, but when you’re talking about historical studies of the Egyptian old kingdom that they base on modern calculations of physics using pictographs as a reference… Like it’s just sounds silly I guess.

You are arguing for a heterodox interpretation of labor based on pictures drawn by the ruling party that has potentially tens of thousands of people building a giant stone monument, when modern scientists JUST discovered a river they only JUST realized might be there.

Like you just really really need to be right about a field of study that’s had like 15 sea changes over the last couple hundred years. It’s odd!

Wow, you really got bodied in this debate. This dude came with actual info and you kinda went full debate bro on him.

I’m sure I’ll see you picking up some wins in another thread.

Man, science communication is in a bad spot if all they’re doing is blunting people’s expectations and, as the previous user very aptly mentioned “yucking everyone’s yum”.

This is why people make fun of Neal Degrass Tyson, many times his explanations are both pedantic and unnecessary, which I would argue is the same as the comment that started this thread.

Especially when what they were talking about was actually listed in the article!

They specially mention this in the article. It does work on multiple antigens beyond ABO, they even list that there are over 40 blood types that we know of with 300+ antigens.

Did what you do at a blood bank involve an education or just a name tag, cause they have receptionists and hourly workers at blood banks.