deleted by creator

Adidas is short for Adolf Dassler… Just leaving that here

If a guy went topless nobody would have given a fuck is the more appropriate comparison, the fact that you have to intentionally reach for the wrong example to make your point work is proof, that the people calling you misogynistic are not far off.

Well at least Tucker was fired over it?

Ich bin ein Teil von jener Kraft, Die stets das Böse will und stets das Gute schafft. … Ich bin der Geist, der stets verneint! Und das mit Recht; denn alles, was entsteht, ist wert, daß es zugrunde geht;
drum besser wär’s, daß nichts entstünde. So ist denn alles, was ihr Sünde, Zerstörung, kurz das Böse nennt, mein eigentliches Element.

the gullible idiots will disappear.

They’ll just jump on the next grifter that tells 'em what they want to hear.

You could make the same argument against every civil liberty the Germans enjoyed in the Weimar Republic: freedom of movement, freedom of press, freedom of assembly, even democracy.

That’s exactly my point, the Nazis never acted in good faith, they were never beholden to the freedoms they used, in fact they used those freedoms to get rid of them, so to protect them we have to restrict them. So unfortunately we have to exclude some things from the protection Democratic values can deliver. For example the swastika in Germany - all it represents, all it refers to in that context is anti democratic, anti freedom so if you show it outside of a educational context we have to assume it represents exactly that - that you want to get rid of democratic values like free speech, so we exclude that symbol from the protection of our democratic values TO protect said democratic values.

It’s a little paradox and a lotta complicated. We should never take those measures lightly but imo they have to exist, because history showed that if you don’t protect them , some forces are willing to use them to destroy them.

Your first link shows what happens when we don’t apply those measures carefully and too broadly, the framework has to be very precise for them to make sense, otherwise they do the job of the deconstructors of democracy for them.

Your second Link refers to a private entity, those can not restrict free speech, they can censor what speech they want to host and it is their right under free speech to do so, so it is irrelevant. Like if you’re in my house talking shit I can kick you out, no free speech was impeded by that action, I just exercised my free speech to show you the door.

Nope. They’re right, you’re wrong.

You didn’t even give specific examples as you pretended to, it was just a blanket “both sides do it!” You just used more words.

And " the only answer to bad speech is more speech" is just factually and provable wrong. The Nazis and their enemies had free speech during the Weimarer Republik, they all used it extensively, the social democrats, the liberals, the communists, the clerics, the workers, the unions, they all used their right to free speech to try and fight the “bad speech” the Nazis could deploy openly, do you know how that story continues? They all lost their free speech because they were forced to let the cancer that is fascism roam free, with lies, propaganda, misinformation, calls for violence and just pure hate.

So the “bad speech” got plenty of “more speech” to counter but it didn’t change anything.

I like to drink a coffee and a glass of juice in the morning. I have put juice instead of milk in my coffee more often than I would admit.

They’re not even in the same packaging, one is a tetra pack, the other is a tall glass bottle.

The start of the issue was when Europeans wanted Jewish people out of Europe after WW2 so they stole a shit ton of land that’s important to three different religions from the Palestinians and called it Israel…

That’s not what happened. There was a strong desire for a Jewish state in Palestine for hundreds of years, in the beginning of the 20th century this was accelerated through the British mandate and immigration. The real story is way more complex and your representation of it is not only wrong but also negates the agency the Jewish population living there for centuries had in creating the Jewish state.

Of course the horrors of the Holocaust had part in the decision but it was not because “Europeans wanted Jews out”

Like I said the real history is waaaaay more complex, I suggest you read up on it - the is a got starting point.

Edit: link didn’t post for some reason - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine

I mean we already got the annoyingly erratic “this isn’t x -website” people that infested every corner of reddit so you might be on to something…

Arrested development is pure comedic genius. Everytime I watch it I discover new jokes.

That’s an interesting idea and since vlc is even able to play files that are still downloading I guess it could also stream a screen grab file that is just temporary?

No, it was invented to stream video files, I don’t think it’s able screen share, but you can use it easily for watch parties. Thats how I understood OPs question.

Oh I haven’t used that function in years but there’s a lot of helpful guides on it out there like this one. It’s a little “complicated” for modern days but it works pretty reliable.

Funny enough streaming videos is vlcs “Main” function - VideoLanClient

Vlc Player was invented for this…

Another dishonest tactic - deflecting to an unimportant part of the argument to hold up the participant with needless explanations for metaphorical concepts.

What the other user meant is that all we know about space travel is, that we need a lot of protective layers around our crafts just for leaving the atmosphere, so one would assume that craft that supposedly travel hundreds of light-years would need a very sophisticated kind of protection. But there is no way to deliver evidence to a theoretical concept, hence why I said your arguing is in bad faith my dear.

edit: and now he takes the cowards way out of a failing argument by deleting his comments. That’s another tactic - ending the conversation, rendering all our arguments worthless and essential wasting our time. Jean Paul Sartre described it well in his quote about anti semitism.

It’s impossible to prove a negative, you simply can not prove that something ISN’T there. It’s such a transparent deflection and you know that, it’s a common conspiracy tactic, dishonest argument 101.

As long as there is no physical evidence that proves the existence of extra terrestrial UFO we have to assume that they are not real. So if you want to maintain they exist, you’ll have to cough up some proof.

Everytime Kissinger is mentioned I have to think of this Anthony Bourdain quote:

“Once you’ve been to Cambodia, you’ll never stop wanting to beat Henry Kissinger to death with your bare hands. You will never again be able to open a newspaper and read about that treacherous, prevaricating, murderous scumbag sitting down for a nice chat with Charlie Rose or attending some black-tie affair for a new glossy magazine without choking. Witness what Henry did in Cambodia – the fruits of his genius for statesmanship – and you will never understand why he’s not sitting in the dock at The Hague next to Milošević.”

Bourdain is dead and that shit stain Kissinger is now over 100 years old. The world is not fair.

Some of those that work forces…