Scientists Crack Cancer’s Hidden Defense With a Breakthrough Protein Discovery
Scientists Crack Cancer’s Hidden Defense With a Breakthrough Protein Discovery
Scientists have discovered a key protein that helps cancer cells avoid detection by the immune system during a type of advanced therapy.Mike O'Neill (SciTechDaily)
France returns flag to Damascus embassy as new Syria authorities build contacts with West
DAMASCUS, Dec 17 (Reuters) - France raised its flag at its Damascus embassy on Tuesday for the first time in 12 years and European Union officials prepared to engage with the new Syrian leadership, a sign of the growing contacts after Bashar al-Assad was ousted as president.
Western states are gradually opening channels to the new authorities in Damascus led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and its leader Ahmed al-Sharaa, though they continue to designate the group as terrorists.
As well as France and Britain, which sent a team to meet Sharaa on Monday, Germany is also planning meetings with the new administration and the European Union said on Tuesday it will also establish contacts.
UN monitor says reviving Iran deal now irrelevant, since Tehran on cusp of nuke
The UN’s top atomic regulator said this week that there was little point in trying to revive the 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and world powers, with Iran already practically a nuclear threshold state.
The comments by International Atomic Energy Agency head Rafael Grossi in Italy on Monday underlined growing frustration by the UN monitor toward Iran, which has blown past stockpile limits set by the landmark pact and spurned inspections since Washington abandoned the deal in 2018.
Under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran was only permitted to enrich uranium to 3.68 percent purity, a level consistent with civilian uses of nuclear technology that Iran claims are its only pursuit, capping its stockpile at 300 kilograms.
But according to an IAEA report handed to member states and leaked to the press earlier this month, Iran has begun dramatically expanding its production of uranium enriched to near-weapons grade levels, collecting enough material for several bombs already.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
Gaza: Nearly one million Palestinians face winter without shelter
Gaza: Nearly one million Palestinians face winter without shelter
Only 23 per cent of Gaza’s shelter needs have been met this autumn, leaving nearly one million Palestinians vulnerable to exposure during the harsh winter months, according to the Norwegian Refugee...NRC
CNN tries to dodge blame for its fake 'freed Syrian prisoner' story
CNN tries to dodge blame for its fake 'freed Syrian prisoner' story
Not three months in prison - but one month. Not a rebel, but a disgraced air force lieutenant. WTF is CNN doing in Syria?Ed Sykes (The Canary)
like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
Doublespeak is real and good. I love my libertarian capitalism just like I love my public safety officers and my right to work states and my rules based liberal international order. Liberty! Whiskey! Sexy! These are the tenants of a righteous, free, and - most importantly - godly nation.
If we just work hard enough and remain honest and forthright and vigilant against the horrors of evil foreign manipulations, every man can live like a king! Work Will Set Us Free! That is why we must keep the truth always within our hearts - that better days are coming if we all just work together towards the ideal individuality. So gather round, my beautiful brilliant diligent future millionaires, and repeat after me:
Welcome to Costco, I love you.
emilycc at Streamer Awards
- YouTube
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.www.youtube.com
FTC bans hidden junk fees in hotel, event ticket prices
cross-posted from: thelemmy.club/post/20311731
The rule is one of the final pieces of President Joe Biden's crackdown on junk fees that drive up consumer costs without providing visible benefits.
Democrats Reject Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for Top Oversight Committee Post
cross-posted from: thelemmy.club/post/20311728
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) soundly defeated Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) to become ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, multiple reports indicated Tuesday.
Democrats Reject Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for Top Oversight Committee Post
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) soundly defeated Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) to become ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, multiple reports indicated Tuesday.Wendell Husebo (Breitbart)
lol
The Poisoning The Well fallacy is a convenient way to dismiss inconvenient truths at times. I more often see this on the right than the left, as denigration of "the media" such as CNN and MSNBC gives them an excuse to ignore or disbelieve any legitimate journalism that they do. But people on the left do it as well. It's not just you, plenty of others here on Lemmy have made similar complaints.
In the end, I do not care, but I do make observations of comments like yours.
Police footage shows multiple Marques Brownlee traffic violations amid speeding scandal - Dexerto
Tech YouTuber Marques Brownlee was served multiple tickets for traffic violations in newly-released police bodycam footage.
I think you're misinterpreting and down voting based on that. I'm not defending anything. I just don't believe this is some kind of theorem. It's just a problem with politics in America.
And I don't know enough to make any claims about the history. I'm merely saying we have to look at the history to make any claims. This type of theorem can't be based on one election. That's all I'm saying.
You seem to know more about policies and shit that I don't know about (I'm European). So that's very insightful, and interesting.
It's a shame the American people are voting right and/or settling for a right-ified left, instead of just forming a better party with better politics. 🤷♂️
For one election?
Which of GWB's rightward policies did Obama undo? Which of Reagan/Bush's policies did Clinton undo?
You're defending a rightward shift that has been going on for decades.
Ok. So apply this to 2016. The left choice was establishment neoliberal who if had won would have put left leaning judges on the Supreme Court ensuring the court for decades. Since she lost a far right extremist won who captured the judicial branch. I guess this doesn't count because people didn't vote for the lesser evil. Or does it?
So the following election again was establishment neoliberalism who won and basically had the most progressive policy's of the last century. I guess that moved us right?
Next election, let's see, establishment neoliberal again. Hard to pinpoint if she was more left or less left because she ran a campaign catering to "on the fence conservatives" but was part of a very progressive administration.
Maybe this what happens when you don't vote for the lesser evil. That's all I see.
“Joe Biden has the most progressive policies of the last decade” - incredible.
I can think of zero politicians with a further left policy platform than Joe Biden. Think of all his progressive moves, like allowing the overturn of roe vs wade, Joe Biden who railed against school racial integration policies, Joe Biden author of the 94 crime bill, Joe Biden who continued building the wall, pro union Joe Biden who compelled the train unions to accept the companies deal. Joe Biden who lends his support both materially and in influence to right wing governments in Ukraine and Israel, supporting genocide in the latter. Etc etc. A real hero of the people this guy, fly out the red flag.
like allowing the overturn of roe vs wade
Voters did this by not voting lesser evil
Joe Biden who railed against school racial integration policies, Joe Biden author of the 94 crime bill,
This was not part of his presidential administration and not my claim.
pro union Joe Biden who compelled the train unions to accept the companies deal
And went back and got sick days for the union after the deal was signed. Only president to march with the union.
Biden who lends his support both materially and in influence to right wing governments in Ukraine and Israel, supporting genocide in the latter. Etc etc. A real hero of the people this guy, fly out the red flag.
I never made the claim he wasn't a neoliberal. I only cited the fact that he was the most progressive president we've seen in the country for as long as I've been alive.
unsupported
How do you not choke on your irony?
With well-reasoned and nuanced principles supported by vast experience.
Unsupported
They've obviously lost the thread and who could blame them? They've been locked up with conservatives for 50+ years. That would be enough to have me blow my brains out.
The point is the whole DNC is a rotten corpse. Maybe at one time the candidates had an ideology but now they've fought every fight they're willing to fight and just want to be old and not bothered. Except they don't want to give up their power. Which is frightening. From their perspective they've only made it this far by clenching tight to power for as long as they could and can't imagine a world where they just live at harmony with people around them. They lose all their clout. No one needs them anymore and they rot to nothing. That's the fear at least.
Everyday I'm more convinced the thing that got us where we are is American hyper competitive mentality. We have to work endlessly. We have to score the best grades. We have to make the most money.
Why can't we just take pride in living peacefully. This is what all the Trumpers are upset about, honestly. They want to be able to live in their podunk town. Doing their unimportant job. Liking the same things their mommy and daddy liked and be unbothered. Culturally that's fucked and we've seen why but idealistically it's fine. We need unimportant people to do unimportant things and be more or less just like the ones who came before. So why not reward it?
I'm rambling.
I'm reminded of children in grade school who "I know what that means, I'm just not going to explain it to you."
Okay. You're a lot of talking for someone who doesn't want to say anything.
How did we get here? I never said we needed to have a "right" specific individual being a leader.
All I'm saying is that I believe that if I have a choice to organize a progressive movement under either 100% Hitler or 90% Hitler. I would choose 90% Hitler. I feel like I'm not alone in that.
How would having a more evil leader, one who hypothetically locks down freedom of speech and starts arresting people, make organizing easier?
Seems like that would make it harder to do.
Did you watch the video? The rock that keeps tigers away is like voting that makes organizing easier.
Politicians react to organized mass movements, rather than elections. You got it backwards.
Which specific issue is systemic?
I'm confused because you keep on jumping around to different points, you argue against positions that I don't have, and you don't directly answer any of my follow-up questions.
If I wasn't sure that you honestly believe what you are saying, I would accuse you of intentionally muddying the water. This looks a lot like psyop stuff.
The issue the meme is decrying: that the political landscape and discourse is shifting to the right.
How often do I need to repeat that I don't know how to explain it to you?
I'm reminded of children in grade school who "I know what that means, I'm just not going to explain it to you."
Yes. In this endeavor you're beginning to understand the means I've chosen for the majority.
Too many commenters here do not understand anything about how any of it works, especially how first past the post voting works. Progressives do not seem to understand that the system has not rejected them, but the voters have.
It is mostly relentless propaganda for the oligarchs that has captured the country. That’s the problem, and it is not fixed by any of the suggestions here.
I agree with that. I never disagreed with the meme.
It has never been my position that voting for the lesser evil will solve all of our problems or bring about a progressive government.
I have only ever argued that voting for the lesser evil will give the people who are trying to organize (us) a better environment for doing so. Voting for the lesser evil helps with the organization. It's weird to me that people are against voting for the lesser evil. I don't get it, I hope someone can explain it to me.
Can you please stop assuming what positions I have?
Evil is Evil. Lesser, greater, middling… Makes no difference. The degree is arbitary. The definition’s blurred. If I’m to choose between one evil and another… I’d rather not choose at all.
I'd sooner choose revolution than get caught up in justifying a bad choice presented by a broken and decaying system that's destroying the planet, people's lives regardless of political affiliation (ie healthcare), and shafting all but the rich.
Even if you accept the choice and choose and win with your lesser evil forever, in the end, you're leaving behind the cumulative total of shit on your children and their children. Yet people are content with that because you're reading Lemmy while shitting on the toilet, hopeless and desperate at the sad state of the world just trying to do what you can to soften the blow to your already chaotic life and the lives of your loved ones. What power do you have to raise a hand against your masters and force drastic change? And that's exactly the point of the choices and the divides.
The evil is sowing doubt in people voting. Representatives fail to represent sometimes, or even often. But not voting just means they don't represent you at all, and don't care that you exist when they represent you.
If people didn't show up and vote for their local officials, and state government officials.... They have sabotaged their city/county/state/country.
All of these representatives start somewhere. If we don't follow and support the local ones that are good, they never get a shot at being say a congresswoman who can break the majority of super majority and help move politics in whichever directions we want them.
(Cause guess where they come from if they aren't politicians moving up.... Either A. Rich or B. funded by the rich.)
How many people did you vote for that weren't Republican or Democrat in your local elections? If you didn't vote for them (3rd party, new party) there, don't expect them to ever exist as a presidential candidate. You can't even qualify to be on the ballot if you don't have the party established. You have to petition on all 50 states to be shown there and you will likely be denied on many.
If you don't like the Republican or Democrat party, a solution would be to get local candidates to run under a new party that fits your views better, still you would NEED to vote for whichever of the 2 parties fits your views best in the presidential vote to SLOW the movement right/left/up/down whatever... And establish that party in enough city's/counties/states to take seats that matter there. Once known... Then and only then would it be viable to split the vote, and you likely lose 4 years to a hard push into the directions you don't want... While the final negotiations and realizations of merging or replacing/allying with the lesser evil party.
Likely meaning a pledge that you would hold primaries that would endorse each other if the winner of a primary shows more people. But you cannot and will not win a presidential election if you split the vote and don't endorse each other
Yeah, the longer it takes the worse it gets. That's one of the points the parent meme is getting across. But that response tells me you missed what I was saying.
Reread and try again.
The argument is when there are more than 2 options a majority of people would not have selected the "winner" over any of the other individual losers. Therefore majority rule is an illusion, democracy is self-contradictory!!!
However, by reducing the options to just 2 you no longer have the same result and "democracy" is more "self-consistent". You can do this in a fair/Democratic way by "simulating" the pairwise interactions (IE ranked choice voting, pairwise majority rule, etc.) or by establishing a false dichotomy (2 party systems, left v right spectrum, etc.).
This is not 'not a thing' but it's a really old idea and is largely solved (ie. Distributed networks like the social media platform we are currently on, or stuff like this).
However, the claim isn't entirely misplaced as modern social institutions refuse to implement any of those methods because it would be against their best interests as those in power are deeply unpopular (yes, especially your favourites whoever that may be). So yes almost all "Democratic" systems you interact with on a daily basis are inherently self-contradictory on the most cursory of examinations, but they dont have to be.
I just wish those campaigning were required to provide policy ideas/plans for what they want to do, and where they want the money to come from. In an ideal world I would give the candidates 0 face time, possibly even no names to the public at first. (Would never work but would be interesting)
The options get a set of questions framed around current events, past events, and possible future events that they would give detailed responses to how they would have, would currently or would plan for those events. No party affiliations known.
Eliminate contenders from the list by most accepted answers from the lists bringing it from say 50 candidates to 25, then 10, then 5, the 3 then 1. The election period is 6 months. No prior rallys, no posturing, no ads, and no names tied to the responses so no one cares about popularity.
The President is whomever wins 1st, Vice President 2nd, and 3rd place is placed on stand-by but works directly with both members to stay informed. If at any time a person makes decisions as president that the other 2 do not believe coorelate with the responses they gave to the people, they call an emergency vote to veto that directive, and recall a ranked choice vote where the population votes for all 3, where the 1st takes the presidency, 2nd VP, 3rd taking the back seat.
Would be fucking crazy, but at least itd be more fun than what we have now...
Because it is creating a checks and balances for the president within the checks and balances of the current government. It would require such a constitutional change, it would require more actions than just a super majority as we believe it would.
Edit: sidebar. Each round of eliminations would present new questions, each candidate would submit. Some would be "illusion" of current or future events but were really past events. This prompting a past president or leader (Congress member, senator etc). To bring up and discuss what the false narrative was, showing what the realism had been. Then giving evaluation of how they responded at the time, and how it went right, wrong, and what could have gone better if done differently. Thus educating both the population and the candidates in doing so. Basically, the first reality TV program worth turning in for or watching brought to everyone via national TV/internet services for free.. and using the ad segments to pay for the costs associated with the applicants. Doing away with campaign fees.
Side bar 2: Yes that means if you serve the nation as a president/ congressperson/ senator / or ambassador you may be called upon to serve your country for a lecture... But that should be fair, as we pay the secret service to protect you for life. A lecture twice after you retire won't kill you. (Shit even Carter would have loved to do this 2 years ago because he wanted to believed in this country). And I would have called him to old.. but with cards and his choosing, I would have been greatful to hear him give peanuts to pinenuts
It's certainly an intriguing idea, but its not as good as the current system. It's a hyperreality of voting that would simply exaggerate flaws of the current system.
First off, good luck keeping anything anonymous. And, even if you could, candidate anonymity is a horrible idea, because you'd have even less accountability and more campaign dishonesty than you have now. Without anonymity, politicians have to at least try to fulfill campaign promises if they want to get reelected. But with anonymity, I can get elected and not follow through on campaign promises because when I run for reelection nobody knows which candidate is me and I can just lie again.
You'd probably also seriously exacerbate political capture. In the interest of putting forth the best policy proposals, people like presidential candidates would certainly outsource writing to powerful lobbies that have the top policy analysists and writers. And these lobbies or other groups would almost certainly only offer services in exchange for certain favors once the candidate is in office. It would lead to massive corruption, more than we're already seeing, because at least without anonymity we can put names to faces and prompt some honesty.
Plus, you'd cut out so many candidates. Not everyone excels at writing. Some candidates might articulate their plans best in real time and on a stage (like JFK, or Reagan, etc.). Demanding that everyone only write and publish policy proposals removes the ability to gauge how good they'd be in office, interacting with staff and other world leaders.
Combining anonymity with a bracketed system would also create an echo chamber, where candidates learn each other's messages every round and the survivors shift to mimic the most popular message to bolster their odds of making it into office. In the end, all 3 people will sound the same in a desperate bid to copycat the clear winner and steal votes. Which obviously creates issues for voting again, like the aforementioned Condorcet's paradox.
Also, voter engagement. We can barely get people to turnout when they are emotionally won-over by a given personality candidate, it would probably crater if voting were a purely rational process as @lifeinmultiplechoice suggests. If you take after John Adams or Rousseau, this isn't entirely problematic because you don't believe in carrying out the principle of "the will of the people" in a literal sense (not to say J.A. was Rousseauian, he obviously was not, but they overlap in this area of restricted voting). But if you are interested in accurately representing "the will of the people" in a non-gnostic sense, this is obviously an unsatisfactory system.
This isn't meant to dismiss @lifeinmultiplechoice out of hand, I admire the imagination. I think they're onto something when they point out that technology has sort of... swapped lenses on the camera of Democracy. We can seriously reinvent Democracy in ways that overcome previous hurdles due to all our technology now... we just don't know how exactly yet.
And I don’t know enough to make any claims about the history. I’m merely saying we have to look at the history to make any claims. This type of theorem can’t be based on one election. That’s all I’m saying.
How convenient that you only know one election when I bring up the previous two cycles of the phenomenon I described, but up until this moment, you were certain that this one election was a fluke.
I don’t think I made any claims that this was a fluke. If so, it wasn’t meant to be received as such. I’m merely saying that one election is not enough to go on.
And now that I've cited multiple elections, can we put that "we only have one election" thing to bed?
You think I did that?
I'm Danish and here your 2 parties would absolutely fit the categories I described. No exaggeration what so ever.
OK. I'll assign more benefit of the doubt.
To be moral and ethical in their voting choice, to serve systemic design intent, to serve the practicalities of implementation, an individual need not care about others' votes.
So, it's incorrect to set as a prerequisite a belief in success of a 5% goal to vote for it. Presenting as you did exemplifies the propaganda-fed ego of the neoliberal. The meaning in voting is not to make you feel good about yourself for choosing the bandwagon that wins. All should vote for whom best represents them with reckless disregard for the short-term outcome.
The eventual counterargument to what I'm saying is rooted in utilitarianism: Democracy produces at best mediocre outcomes. The systemic design answer was the electoral college.
No I do not. I don't think they support genocide either, but they do support a country committing genocide, which is absolutely disgusting too. But I'm perhaps splitting hairs there.
Do you think they support a country committing genocide because people are voting for them? Or vice versa.
No I do not. I don’t think they support genocide either, but they do support a country committing genocide, which is absolutely disgusting too. But I’m perhaps splitting hairs there.
I make no distinction between the two, and I consider your hair splitting to be an attempt to downplay it.
Do you think they support a country committing genocide because people are voting for them?
I think they support genocide regardless of who voted for them. I think they do so for the sheer love of it. If you support genocide you lose the benefit of the doubt.
If you're saying that the Left should vote for the Dems I agree.
I'd love to have Bernie as President, but our side dropped the ball twice and failed to get him nominated.
Which begs the question, why fly the Hammer and Sickle at all?
Politics is a game and if you want to win elections you should learn to play it.
Nixon hid his anti-Black agenda behind phrases like 'safe streets' and 'the War on Drugs.'
Do you want to win elections or do you want to lose but be able to boast about how pure your intentions were?
Carlin was born and raised in New York City. Morningside Heights [aka 'White Harlem']
New York City voted 90% against Donnie.
Carlin also came out for McGovern against Nixon.
Unlike many people, Carlin could adapt and change with the times. Heck, he even did a show on Fox.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geor…
George did a TV show on the FOX network.
I love his stuff, but that doesn't blind me to the fact that he was primarily an entertainer.
I consider your hair splitting to be an attempt to downplay it
Please don't. Me admitting to hair splitting is meant to show how much I despise supporting either one. 👍
I think they support genocide regardless of who voted for them.
So in that case, we agree "voting for the lesser evil" has nothing to do with it, then. 👍
Again though, I really can't blame people for being disillusioned with the democratic system in general, right? We've just been through a generational moment where any viable left opposition in the West got shit-housed into oblivion, and AOC is giving us a great lesson in what succeeding through the proper channels means in practice. And what has been the response from the political class more generally? To move even further right!
It's a miserable situation ofc, and I don't blame you at all for venting. But neither do I blame people for venting despite doing nothing else. Sanders raised a lot of money, and a lot of volunteer hours, and what did it yield? And the fallout from Corbynism has been as bad if not worse. Many people got blacklisted over it, and several door knockers ended up in hospital — why would anyone want to put themselves on the line like that again, especially when the potential gains are so meager?
Dgmw, I too wish that people would channel their anger through effective organizing, but imho it's become a lot less clear in recent years what that would mean.
Politicians are walking a fine line between catering to what the people want and deciding on things that actually benefit the people. It's a difficult thing. Should politicians represent the people, or should they have the mandate to make decisions the people may not agree with but are better for the people.
At the very least, they shouldn't make decisions that benefit only themselves and their rich friends. 💀
I have a hard time taking this as a joke, if it was intended as one, because there were very serious discussions regarding this before and after the election.
Not in isolation, no. We have it in Australia, but we're not socialist.
But I'd say first past the post voting is antithetical to democracy and one ought to fight to remove it.
Democracy is mathematically impossible.
if democracy was not possible, how does it come that the greek did democracy and it is said they were once overrun in a war because of beeing democratic? if something was a cause for a turn of a war, i pretty much believe it to really exist, no matter what some kind of half baked formulars "predicted" once.
if democracy existed and your math says thats not possible, i'ld guess your math might simply be 'slightly' wrong about it or was created with (un-)intentional biases in mind 
just to note:
in the history of human predictions based on thought through and wordly/mathmatically described rules, the most common thing afterwards was, that those rules and also their predictions were just fundamentally wrong and biased.
Communists don't want to win elections, they want a proletarian dictatorship, one that completely subjugates the bourgeois class, which you cannot do from within the bourgeois class's state.
The hammer and sickle is what guarantees that optics will not come before that goal. No AOC will fly your flag to convince people to vote for Kamala Harris.
Threads Has Blocked Minds From Federating With Them
...an't say I'm surprised, but it does expose their federation push to be a charade. Same old facebook, censoring free speech!#activitypub #federation #censorship #minds. Subscribe to @mark on Minds
⚠️Threads.net has blocked us from federating with them. Can't say I'm surprised, but it does expose their federation push to be a charade. Same old facebook, censoring free speech! #activitypub #federation #censorship #minds | Minds
...an't say I'm surprised, but it does expose their federation push to be a charade. Same old facebook, censoring free speech! #activitypub #federation #censorship #minds. Subscribe to @mark on MindsMinds
like this
haverholm likes this.
like this
haverholm likes this.
realcaseyrollins doesn't like this.
I guess they view themselves as being censored from Threads? 🤷🏾♂️
I mean, boo hoo, it's not like any of us are pretending that Meta supports free speech principles in practice...
haverholm likes this.
Given how much fediverse users have actively campaigned for instances to defederate from Threads, this martyr posturing tells me a lot about Minds.
Besides, they're still free to talk, doesn't mean others have to listen.
Syria's new rulers are already mad at Israel and the West
Syria's new rulers are already mad at Israel and the West
That didn't take long, did it?Anti-imperialist News (Anti-imperial Nexus)
Fellow Westoids, I beg of you, stop 👏 believing 👏 your 👏 media 👏
CNN got so confused it decided to stage the release of a “political prisoner” of Assad. You can imagine how embarrassed CNN felt when the innocent man turned out to be a former intelligence officer guilty of extortion and harassment. That man is now on the loose in “liberated” Syria. The prison he was freed from was opened two days earlier. Syrian reporters watched as Turkish search teams went through the cells one by one. Somehow they missed this man who was allegedly left without food or water for four days.The fakery was so obvious, it was even called out by former prisoners of Assad, but if you are still in doubt, just know that HTS was mocking CNN on Telegram: “If it wasn’t a play to achieve a scoop for CNN and laugh at the West’s stupidity, it is more likely that one of the detainees has no place to go and prefers to stay in prison and sleep there.”
The goal of Israel is to keep them fighting each other while Israel takes the pie. A tale as old as time.
Currently they are doing HTS vs YPG in the north while Israel takes the southwest of Syria for free
Al-Golani also said: “We were able to end the Iranian presence in Syria, but we are not enemies of the Iranian people.” I guess it’s a matter of time until al-Golani U-turns and realises he has no choice but to ally with Iran to protect Syria.
surely al-golani's knows that the united states will do the same to him that was done to al-assad, so i wonder what they gave him to be willing to throw away his future like that.
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
This is rather odd, given we’re told that HTS and ISIS are enemies, and the US has been bombing ISIS to protect Syrians.
US has been bombing southern Syria, which is FSA controlled that has allied with Kurds to fight ISIS, but is well separated from Turkey/US backed factions. ISIS is simply HTS, that came from Iraq/Turkish border with Turkish support. The US is bombing anti-Turkish/ISIS factions. It is easy to not fact check this lie. ISIS is a US funded ally, and only attack US enemies. It is simply deflection for US to say they are bombing ISIS, as FSA is simply less of a friend to Israel as HTS/ISIS is.
A Vision of the Future – Visi On
Denmark: Union website deindexed by Google in the firm’s latest search experiment
Denmark: Union website deindexed by Google in the firm’s latest search experiment
The Danish Union of Journalists (DJ) website is no longer visible from Google’s search results for 1% of Danish users as part of a “time-limited ...European Federation of Journalists
Searx is the only one I know of. Most others repackage one of the big tech companies' results.
Edit: Brave uses its own search index, but isn't open source. Also Brendan Eich is a tremendous asshole.
realcaseyrollins likes this.
docs.searxng.org/
'College GameDay' celebrates most-watched regular season ever
After adding Nick Saban this year, ESPN's College GameDay is celebrating the best season in the thirty year plus history of the show.
MLS looks to make Season Pass more accessible in 2025
MLS is looking to expand the entry points to MLS Season Pass in 2025, and is also looking into creating featured windows for games.
12 dead at a ski resort in Georgia from possible carbon monoxide poisoning
cross-posted from: thelemmy.club/post/20310368
Georgia’s Ministry of Internal Affairs said the 11 Indian nationals and one Georgian were all employees at a restaurant in Gudauri, a popular ski resort near the Russian border.
12 dead at a ski resort in Caucasus Mountains of Georgia from possible carbon monoxide poisoning
Twelve people were found dead at a ski resort in the Caucasus Mountains of Georgia, officials said, in what may be a case of carbon monoxide poisoning.Mithil Aggarwal (NBC News)
not_that_guy05
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •And?
The US backed away from the deal. It is Iran's interest to make one in order to protect it's own sovereignty.
Look at Ukraine. Loot at Palestine.
Nobody will help you.
john89
in reply to not_that_guy05 • • •thefluffiest
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •geneva_convenience
in reply to thefluffiest • • •HumanPenguin
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •randon31415
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •Grapho
in reply to randon31415 • • •john89
in reply to randon31415 • • •en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_O…
Zionists would literally rather destroy the world than give up their perceived entitlement to israel.
Religious nationalism is a hell of a drug!
krolden
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •You mean handed to the press by their handlers
technocrit
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •PowerCrazy
in reply to geneva_convenience • • •Where are the hexbear people with their image macro's. I need the one of Netanyahu with the cartoonish bomb.
Ah found it. This is from like 2004 or something.
e: apparently 2012 67th United Nations General Assembly meeting Sept. 27, 2012
john89
in reply to PowerCrazy • • •I downvote anyone who promotes inter-instance animosity.
It's a good litmus test for seeing who is and is not worth taking seriously.