• 0 Posts
  • 17 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 11th, 2023

help-circle
  • Are you trying to equate the ideology of a political regime with a minority population of South Africans?

    South Africa had no right to exist as an apartheid state, and Israel has no right to exist as an apartheid state.

    After apartheid ended and living conditions improved, black South Africans didn’t go and slaughter every white South African as retribution, so when Israel says freed Palestinians would slaughter all Israelites, why should we believe them?

    If the occupation ended today and Palestinians were allowed to live fairly and given ample resources to rebuild, what reason would they have to seek further conflict? If treated fairly, why would Palestinians act any differently than the South Africans freed from apartheid? This conflict is ultimately the direct result of unfair treatment after all.


  • Why are there foreign judges serving in Hong Kong?

    It is a holdover from Hong Kong’s past as a British colony. After the UK handed Hong Kong back to China in 1997, the agreement between the countries stipulated that the special territory would continue to operate with its freedoms and systems for 50 years- including its common law legal system which operates in several other jurisdictions worldwide. Currently there seven foreign judges remaining on the court– three British and four from Australia.

    So, foreign judges who are meddling in HK affairs are upset that China (the inheritor of HK) is meddling in HK affairs?

    If the West actually cared about HK independence, why do they wish to maintain colonial judges in HK courts? If they cared, shouldn’t HK judges be in HK courts?

    While China has been heavy handed in its effort to speed up the timeline of the power transfer, in the end, the West has concluded that HK is to be Chinese territory. By the West’s own policy, these are foreign judges getting kicked out by the “rightful” new rulers, just a bit early.




  • I would say it is quite well established that Israel wants to continue the conflict. I don’t think that is an opinion at this point.

    Sure, the title isn’t the best, but isn’t that also the point they are trying to make?

    To put it briefly, the story is being reported on, but it seems that the media who live off clicks and eyeballs are basically doing the equivalent of “anti-clickbait” and downplaying the significance of these stories.


  • The referenced article primarily critiques the phrasing and tone of the headlines. Through engineering of the headline, you can affect how the body of the article is perceived. The headlines are all quite flaccid and downplay the significance of the refusal. Not coming to an agreement right now, is an admission of intent to enter Rafa.

    Headlines are very important as many people will only skim the title. Perhaps you did the same here, and were bamboozled by the headline of the original article?

    The links you posted here are just more examples of what the original piece was criticising.



  • Neither the owner, Aaron Rubashkin, nor his sons Sholom and Heshy, who were in charge of the management of Agriprocessors, were convicted of immigration or labor law violations, although both Aaron and son Sholom were initially charged with 9,311 counts of child labor law violation, for which they could have faced over 700 years in prison if found guilty. All charges against Aaron were dropped right before the trial was scheduled to begin, and after a five-week trial Sholom was acquitted on all charges of violating child labor laws.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postville_raid

    Undocumented workers have no rights. If they don’t accept the bad pay and conditions offered, they get reported. The state takes the current group of “troublemakers” away and you hire fresh immigrants.

    All charges being dropped against the owners of the plant just before the trial is either corruption or a plea deal. The owners very likely snitched on themselves in exchange for amnesty.

    Continued in reply…






  • No, it’s:

    “Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in boogie woogie reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.”


  • Come on. Those who actually believe in “neutrality” are either fools or liars. Of course China would have an opinion on the conflict.

    Anyways, the article is garbage and provides no evidence of any wrongdoing. It literally states that there is no evidence of China sending weapons to Russia, but then starts fearmongering and implying that whatever common goods are being sent are actually being used for war. Iraq’s aluminum tubes pt 2.