wasimanitoba

I think the difference is that you can specify independently verifiable criteria for the selection process and require participants to decide based on those criteria alone without forcing them to become political actors who must directly bear the consequences of political decisions.

Not totally immune to issues of partisanship, but at least somewhat insulated.

Physical Health, mental health, the economy, social disorder, family; we can influence these things that cause stress but often we can't "control" them.

I'm relieved to see another educated person doing this.

It's gotten worse for me lately, where I keep mixing up train stations and locations with similar names or characteristics, so I can totally imagine hearing Thailand and thinking about Indonesia instead.

Meanwhile, they forced AI Copilot bloat into Notepad, whose singular use-case was supposed to be that it does one thing well without unnecessary features.

I appreciate your response, even if the other poster doesn't.

He was hilariously brazen in his attempt to sell a Senate seat. His attempt to claim it was all a conspiracy against him was even more hilarious.

But that leg must weigh more than a person because their total biomass of 12 megatons is "more than all the wild birds and mammals taken together".

Their answer to me is "but you called us", which is fair, but they could just rephrase the message to "WE WILL NEVER CONTACT YOU TO ASK FOR THIS CODE"

Assuming the drop in social program expenditure doesn't already compensate for the drop in tax revenue.

You cannot give away some thing that doesn't belong to you.

If I accept stolen property which I know to be ill-gotten, then I am as responsible as the thief.

A Jewish state could've been established peacefully somewhere out in Utah instead (or joined the millions of American Jews prospering safely in their communities), but Palestinians had their land taken instead.

Why? Racism, plain and simple. Like the Native Americans, the Palestinians were treated as mere savages who could be dispossessed without consequence.

- The British offered land that didn't belong to them because of colonialism

- They offered land to Zionists to further their imperialist goals

- The British enabled Jewish immigration to Palestine when it was clear that Zionists intended to take over the entire territory of Palestine

- The local Arab population wasn't stupid and they understood that Zionism was an organized political program driven in large part by Jewish religious extremists to take away their home

That only some Zionists resorted to terrorist bombing campaigns against the British is hardly "patiently waiting".

They were only there because of the British and still waged war against them, mirroring Israel's refusal to heed US admonitions against illegal land grabs in the West Bank despite absolute dependence on American protection.

It's a client state that feels it can write the rules, steal what it wants and bites the hand that feeds it.

No group would or should have to tolerate a foreign state being established on their soil at gunpoint by colonial powers.

> the Arab countries decided to wage war in Israel after the UN proposed the two state solution

- That doesn't make sense. Israel didn't exist until it was established.

- The Arabs didn't voluntarily leave their villages.

- And during 1947, the Arabs ejected from the Arab side of the UN partition line did not leave because they wanted to give more land to Israel or because of the Arab League intervention a year later in 1948.....They left because of ethnic cleansing by Jewish religious extremists.

> other founding figures in Zionism called for peace and integration in the Middle East.

To the contrary, Israeli leadership wanted all of Palestine and the UN plan was treated as a stepping stone toward Greater Israel.

The current Prime Minister of Israel Netanyahu also rejects a two state solution, insisting for decades that only Israeli sovereignty should be allowed between the Jordan River and the Sea.