source? i’m seeing that straight-to-death was known since 1940 (mere months after Auschwitz was built), the polish government published the conditions in 1942, and the ICEC knew by 1943. through the same ways we knew about Auschwitz is how we have reports from Uyghur and none of them mention Auschwitz mass-killings. we can recognize atrocities without said atrocities being as bad as Auschwitz

Stanford gave us much more than Peter Thiel

the very purpose of the floatillas is to get the mice out of the war-torn area to safety

What kind of human was he?

what’s “The Daily Adda”? where’s the video mentioned?

what’s “The Daily Adda”? where’s the video mentioned?

I don't see anyone criticizing people for not being sad. There's a difference between that and criticizing people for being jubilant (not just not sad) about death.

how does that link help 😭

source?

I'm seeing that they ran a small farming business in a small farming village: https://gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2011/12/06/ubi-uncensored.aspx

Nobody's criticizing people for not being sad. There's a word for this, "gloating".

You misunderstand what makes for effective propaganda and what makes for preaching to the choir.

yeah, that’s not how you get people convinced trump is bad

it’s hard to tell whether you’re serious over text. next time, you could use tone indicators or an explanation to clarify a meaning!

Not to mention, the Xinjiang part of this argument doesn't really make sense either. The Xinjiang stuff does not involve direct death (besides conditions being as horrible as prison) so that it is far worse than death: it kills the culture, is suspected of forcing organ donations, and institutes sterilization. Unfortunately for the Uyghurs, death is not involved here.

What I'm hearing you say is China's not that evil and if they were committing genocide they would only do that for a short while.

I can no longer tell whether you're pro- or anti-China.

the "amenities" eliminated are parking minimums, and you're assuming that the parking minimums aren't causing oversupply of unused parking lots. check out the very third photo in the article (the overhead view of a parking lot), its first example of a housing development benefiting from the change. notice how less than half of the spots and thus less than a quarter of the land was being used

plus, for housing, the parking minimum's only eliminated for affordable housing, senior housing, childcare, and homes <1,200 ft^2^. family housing still requires 1 parking spot per home

These people will still own cars

not necessarily

That's privilege escalation for you. 7.8 is pretty high.

The bullet that grazed Trump's ear has been analyzed to death as too close to be fatal from the gunman's distance to reliably stage. There are numerous more plausible explanations than the one the video puts forward.

1. It is obvious that there might be good-looking photos if you take enough of them at any historical event. We already know that GOP campaigners cunningly used the assassination to their advantage for propaganda; the staffer is simply realizing that photos off the vent should be taken.
2. At the end it looks more like he's telling the photographers to keep their distance and pulling them away from Trump. There is absolutely no way he can see the camera viewfinder from such a distance, which is needed to decide on how to adjust the framing as the video purports he's doing.
3. The flag is simply being seen from a different angle. Throughout the video, the cameraman is approaching the gates, and then he tilts the camera upwards and then downwards. The former brings the flag into view and the latter is why the flag also looks like it's being raised right after 0:36. Cross-reference the footage with https://www.youtube.com/live/Rr63RgGN-Yo?t=24263 (in both footage you see an agent go to the outermost. in the long livestream this is immediately followed by an agent waving Trump's red cap.), a wide view, and the flag seems static.

I don't like the conspiracy theories going on here. If it were staged, why would the gunman be off-camera to fire the shots? Wouldn't we get more dramatic imagery? Everything in the footage seems awkward, not like tense danger. Trump doesn't even realize (not to mention react) when the shots are fired (which, btw, were in the hallway outside just in case this is how somebody learns that this happened) until 20 seconds after.

A society with an endless deluge of information increasingly known as "may contain distortions of reality" tends to make anyone lose their minds, one way or another.