"The Epstein Class" intentionally incorporates those that were Epstein's clients and those who are merely wealthy enough to be, but may not have been. This is good for several reasons, including the tying of the moral to the structural (as symptom, not cause) and creating pressure and division within that class. It does not suggest a lack of structural failure.
It is correct to call them the Epstein class.

All corporate corruption is related to abusing children.

Big if true. Make him watch Disney and Star Trek if true.

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. It's the best book I've ever read. I'm not counting, but I've read a lot of books. Douglas Adams' style is just 😙🤌

Yes. The law is based on "expectation of privacy". If you're out in public, you're not in a place where you can reasonably assume privacy, so you are ok to be filmed/photographed.

In principle, targeting someone and taking photos of them should be illegal, under harassment law.
In practice, this will only apply if you are brown and don't speak very good English.

Who's the coolest guy in the hospital?

The ultra sound guy.

But who's the coolest guy in the hospital when the ultra sound guy is off?

The hip replacement guy.

I think you have your answer. The bias towards Israel, and the transphobia are writ large in this thread.
These have been well documented, and on their own render opposition to BBC news reporting a perfectly reasonable position to hold.

Ok. That's fair. But Vindman is obviously to the right of the Democratic voter base, so he would've dragged the party further to the right than the people the Democrats are supposed to represent. That is a problem. And for the past few decades, we've seen western democracies drift to the right as a result of this mechanic. Now, we have proto-fascists in high office. That needs to stop.
Elections need to be fair.

It's democracy, not football. Representation matters more than the colour of the shirt on the winner.
If the entire Democrat party shifts to the right, who represents the left? What's even the point of the Dems winning if they're just a bunch of MAGAts in blue ties?

Illogical. Wishing on a star requires a 'shooting star', which is in fact a meteor burning up while falling into Earth's gravity well due to the Earth transiting through its solar neighborhood during its course around the Sun.

Ah. An Arthur C. Clarke man of wit and discretion, I see.

We're still going through the Perseids right now, you should see a few if you are patient enough and the night skies are clear.

That is why empiricism relies on sensory information.
So you don't need axioms for empiricism, just to be clear. Your saying "actually" could make it look like you're disagreeing, when you're actually not.

As a Britisher, I would have indeed used lorry. Or Ludwig man with a van Beethoven

That'll be it then. I tried to get into it twice and failed. Sorry to have made you explain it!

Oh my god. "Truck" was RIGHT there!

We don't need axioms for empiricism. That's the entire point. We ask questions of physical reality and infer limited and verifiable knowledge from the results, without ever stating that anything has been proven.

There's no evidence for the Copenhagen interpretation either, it's just the most conservative.

I feel... like I'm missing something