when the people who make the rules say "Sorry, the rules are the rules, there's nothing we can do" remember that they literally gave a tree human rights just because they felt like it.
I'm just trying to establish conditions by which we all might agree that this is worth looking into before they happen. It's easy to try to play connect the dots with the stars, there are a bunch of them already and you can just ignore the ones that don't make the picture you want. I'm trying to add predictions to this theory in the name of the scientific method - if another whistleblower dies before his testimony is complete, that will be beyond what I can dismiss as coincidence.
Okay, but in the interest of not pretending that They Would Never(tm) can we all agree that if a THIRD whistleblower dies shortly before or during testimony that maybe something is happening here? You have the guy who committed suicide in the middle of depositions after telling his friend "If I commit suicide, no I absolutely did not" and now the healthy 45 year old who all of a sudden has multiple infections and a stroke. Is there a point at which you'd accept the idea that it's a bit beyond coincidence that the deadliest place in the world seems to be the witness stand at a trial where Boeing is the defendant?
I mean, suiciding the guy who flat out told his friends "If I commit suicide no I didn't" shows that agent 747 was due to update his techniques and understanding.
then lets assume a similar situation pops up, as they do from time to time. someone is hellbent on violence, is already committing a lot of violence, and is escalating rather than stopping. How would you architect a peaceful solution to that, and what would you say to the families of the people who were killed while you were architecting that peaceful solutions. It's all well and good to say "there has to be some more peaceful solution" but then you have to actually find it and implement it.
this happened to be back in the 90’s & 00’s when biden et al. spearheaded non-dischargeable student loan debt; anti-gay marriage; and a ban on gays in the military and now i’m permanently anti the party that rolled back don't ask don't tell, embraced marriage and healthcare rights for queer people and have forgiven tons of student loan debt. I'm definitely not a psy-op. Pay no attention to the fact that no one calls them 'the democrat party' except people who have 1000+ hours viewing fox news.
The problem, from the government's perspective, is that there's no way to only see some of the fnords. If we teach people to recognize Chinese propaganda, they'll start to recognize American propaganda too. Better to keep us stupid and then control who's allowed to talk to us in the first place.
once again - not a ban, a seizure. Steve Mnuchin is heading a group of government insiders who want to buy TikTok, and this bill bans it if and only if they don't sell. The government has decided that TikTok is a dangerous propaganda and espionage network and intends to steal it and run it themselves. Even if you think that TikTok is that dangerous you have to ask yourself: why is it legal for everyone else and why does our government want so badly to do it themselves?
when the people who make the rules say "Sorry, the rules are the rules, there's nothing we can do" remember that they literally gave a tree human rights just because they felt like it.