Probably, we've been functionally the 51st state for a long time, it's only Trump's clumsy attempts to close the deal that is finally making people aware of the fact. And our politicians lie straight to our faces about it, they do it while saying they aren't, while saying they won't, and they've done so for decades. Because they know we really don't want to be so attached to the US, but they do it anyway and if challenged just say it is necessary. Necessary for the US, maybe. Necessary for the politicians, maybe. Nice to see Canadians fight back and prove it is not necessary.
We should skip the whole world war step and go straight to Nuremburg 2.0, now improved with faster sentencing and harsher sentences for fascists and collaborators.
4 hours seems a bit much, I'll agree that seems out of line. But I don't think it's unreasonable that some questions were asked and he was ultimately approved to enter Canada so it seems like the system, in this case, worked mostly as intended aside from the amount of time it took to reach that conclusion. Canada has had several recent high profile incidents of not adequately vetting extremists entering this country to speak at conferences, and I am not surprised they are carefully screening people in this situation now. While it is tempting to jump to the conclusion that this guy was singled out for supporting Palestine, one isolated incident is not evidence of bias or profiling on any particular issue, there would need to be a consistent pattern established. Maybe there is one and I just haven't seen it yet, but as far as I know this is an isolated incident so far.
it is a shame that Israel/Palestine has become such a sharply polarizing and divisive issue that we can almost automatically assume that anyone questioning anyone else on the topic is not doing so in good faith and is pushing their own agenda on it, but that's actually not necessarily the case. Someone can say they're a Princeton professor and have worked for the UN, but might take some time to actually verify if you're not traveling with UN and Princeton travel documents, and even that doesn't prove good intentions anyway. People can have solid credentials in their past, but have changed into something more extreme since then. Unless the person is well-known and already on a list somewhere, you don't know where the person stands now unless you ask questions and verify answers. Should that have taken 4 hours? Again, probably not, but I don't think it's the asking of some of those questions that is the problem here.
That said, if there is going to be a pattern of this, I plan to be watching out for it now. I expect the same process to happen for people coming here to speak in support of the genocide, and I expect them to be refused entry. Will this happen? I don't know. We'll see.
It's definitely not burn-in, it's likely some kind of defect in the backlighting system. For most LCDs the "backlight" is essentially a big thin white/mirrored panel reflecting or diffusing light in a very carefully consistent way from a very bright light source, typically either a fluorescent tube at the bottom or more commonly nowadays evenly spaced strips of LEDs. Some higher end models use more elaborate designs but they're the minority. Defects in the backlight panel, the back of the LCD panel, or stuff like dust or even insects getting inside that reflective/diffuser chamber will affect the consistency of the backlight as it both blocks a bit of the light from reaching some places and reflects it to other places it shouldn't be. That's what it looks like is happening here. It could be some kind of delamination of some of the surfaces inside the TV, or it could be some puff of dust that somehow got inside, or even something like a spider decided that was a great place for a cobweb. Without opening the panel it's hard to say what's going on exactly, it might just need a very delicate cleaning or it might need replacement parts.
If you're afraid of spiders, I'm sorry, you just have to burn the house down now, it's the only way to be sure.
The only reason NATO would be involved in a limited nuclear war is if little "multipolar man" decides to start one, in which case we'll certainly fucking end it for him. That's how it will be limited.
Couldn't have said it better myself. This is what they've done and are continuing to do to phones. We talk about the Apple and Google's "walled gardens" but it's even more than that. It's about only allowing "trusted" applications to run, on "trusted" operating systems, with "trusted" drivers and "trusted" hardware, for "your security", to "protect you" (from yourself). But it's really about control, complete control, not just of our devices but of us as people.
That is what they intend to do to all computing devices. Over time, gradually. They know they can't do it overnight and force it down people's throats, because it's fundamentally anti-freedom, people will resist, rebel, start to switch to devices and systems that allow them to take back their personal and computing autonomy, using technology to enable their own goals instead of what the manufacturers and services "allow". So they have to slowly creep it in. People still resist and rebel, but they keep pushing ever so subtly towards more control for them and less control for you. One step back is followed by two steps forward, then another step back when people resist, then another two steps forward. Progress keeps being made, despite the resistance. They will keep normalizing it until people say "well of course they have to protect
<x>
" and we forget that the freedom to decide what we ourselves are willing to trust so we can do what we want with the hardware and software we own is a fundamental and necessary human right.
It means you can basically run even more Windows programs on Linux than you already can, and that's wonderful. At the rate it's going, soon Wine and Linux will be more compatible with Windows software than Windows itself is. Especially older stuff.
Me too. At least with Temu and Wish I know the majority of my money is going directly to some crook in China and not to Bezos. Cut out the extra middleman. Same low quality of goods, direct from the drop-shipper lying about them or perhaps even the factory counterfeiting them. It's a substantial improvement in supply chain honesty and legitimacy, you're left with no illusions about the products and all the reviews are fake, so it's deeply refreshing to not have to try to figure any of it out. It's always 100% consistent. You know exactly what to expect, with no worry you're accidentally going to overpay for something you think is genuine and receive a box full of rocks that's obviously been opened, stolen and returned, nah not on these sites. You'll get exactly what's pictured (not to scale necessarily, though). Way more reliable than Amazon.
Not sure if you're being sarcastic, but I want to emphasize that whether you mean it that way or not, it's true. Each person helping and participating makes the work a little easier and success a little closer. A movement requires leaders and builders, certainly, and those people are often doing a lot of heavy lifting. But it also simply requires members, and numbers, and people just showing up. Your support, simply just being here, means more than you might know.
Good, let them. I'd rather be able to see my enemy than have them creeping up on me from the shadows. This train is now fully in motion, and we all know what's coming, it's either going to reach its destination or we're going to derail it. It's about time we all see who the fascists are, and everyone who's supporting them. Let's stop dancing around each other, it's time we really start to fight.
Oh, so you don't like my summary of the article you didn't read? Maybe you should go read the article then, then you can come back here and we can have a proper argument about what you expected the TL;DR should be.
I don't know why you think you don't have time to read the article, you seem to have an awful lot of time to split hairs about "out of touch with voters" vs "out of touch with reality" as if these are vastly different things in your attempt to start an argument while agreeing with literally everything I was trying to suggest with that term. I have clearly made the mistake of stepping into your well-laid trap, you got me, fair and square, I concede to your superior intellectual position and withdraw my own, whatever you think that may be.
I have to say though, you sound very much like you have a little bit of personal opinion going on here too. I'm not terribly interested in what that is, so I'll be leaving now.
What a shame we don't have enough armed forces to defend and patrol one of the most remote, inhospitable, largest territories and longest coastlines of any country in the world. You would almost expect that would take a significantly larger military budget than your economic peers, not a vastly smaller one. Funny how that works out.
But yeah let's just keep selling off all our natural resources for bargain basement prices to a single bidder and doing nothing to defend them from anyone else. Once the natural resources are all gone we'll have nothing left worth defending anyway. So I guess that's the long-term strategy?
So far, I think you're safe!