And yet, they still refuse to even consider taking any kind of responsibility
And yet, they still refuse to even consider taking any kind of responsibility
That was a great explanation, thank you
Did you bring the buttfor?
Zionism does not equal Judaism; it’s a political stance, not a cultural identity
Look, I don’t like Kamala either and I think continuing to supply weapons is awful, obviously. But she’s the only realistic option at this point. You can still protest the genocide in Gaza AFTER the election (and I fully support you doing so, Hell I might even meet you at one), but look at it this way: if Kamala wins, you at least have a chance to make a change over there, but if Trump wins again, every Palestinian is as good as dead. Do I like either option? No! Do I think our elections are a good system? No! Am I going to vote for Kamala anyway? Yes! Because at this point, the choice is between shooting ourselves in the foot or in the temple
It’s the only realistic option at this point. You can still protest the genocide in Gaza AFTER the election (and I fully support you doing so, Hell I might even meet you at one), but look at it this way: if Kamala wins, you have a chance to make a change over there, but if Trump wins again, every Palestinian is as good as dead. Do I like either option? No! Do I think our elections are a good system? No! Am I going to vote for Kamala anyway? Yes! Because at this point, the choice is between shooting ourselves in the foot or in the temple
Lol giving away money at all, especially to large monopolistic corporations like Google. They don’t need my money, they already have plenty
Not gonna lie, I bit the bullet and got YT Premium almost 5 years ago. Honestly, one of the best purchases I’ve ever made in my adult life, hands down
Lol true, you don’t hear anyone say it anymore. Monster Squad 1987
It’s Business Insider, always read whatever they say with spoonfuls of salt
Wolfman’s got nards
We can only hope
The key signature for A minor is no sharps or flats, but if that’s the joke they’re going for, then both images are in A minor. So I’m not entirely sure what they’re trying to go for here either
This is extremely simplistic and reductive, but essentially, after JD Vance was named Trump’s VP, someone made a shit post saying ‘Wow, I can’t believe he said he had sex with a couch, that’s wild’. To their slight credit, the same person commented like an hour later admiting it was all a lie (they just posted the Arthur meme of “You think someone would do that? Go on the internet and tell lies?”), but that didn’t really matter and it got shared around a lot, mostly by people who knew it was fake news but still thought it was funny anyway.
Later that week, AP News did a fact check on it (because, sadly, they have to do A LOT of false-fact debunking) and they essentially said “JD Vance did not have sex with a couch”. HOWEVER, they have an internal policy that says their fact-checks must say only the truth, even if they have to be extremely specific in their wording. Since they originally said “No, he has never had sex with a couch” but, technically speaking, unless they’ve been spying on him for his entire life, there’s no way to actually PROVE that, so they had to take it down. Lots of people saw it get taken down and jumped on that fact as a ‘Well, then he must have done it, obviously’ and the memes continued.
Fast forward to today, and some FOX host who probably still uses Yahoo as their search engine and has no connection with meme culture is demanding the video proof that they presume to exist despite no one EVER saying that there’s proof.
Hope that answered most of your questions
Edit: slightly wording fix
It’s not even casual internet surfing anymore. While looking for a job several months ago, I had to create a new account on every. Single. Fucking. Application.
Uhm, is that supposed to be achievable?
No they don’t. But they probably have the right wealth to get out of it with a fine that’s probably less than whatever interest is generated by their smallest savings account
So this summary I’m going to give really does not do justice to the whole situation, but I’m going to try to be brief-yet-informative:
In 1921, Tulsa, Oklahoma, a black teenager, Dick Rowland, was arrested for ‘assaulting’ a white woman (most reports say he likely just tripped and accidentally touched her as he fell; she declined to give a statement). At the time, the black community in Tulsa was one of the most financially successful in the country, colloquially called “Black Wall Street.” Meanwhile, the KKK and racism in general were at a historic high across the entire country, not just the South. As news spread over the arrest, a large group of white people (some of whom had been deputized earlier that day for this exact purpose) arrived at the jail to lynch Rowland as well as a smaller group of black people who arrived to defend him from what was certainly going to be his death. Some sources disagree on how EXACTLY the violence started but the general consensus is that the police convinced the black group to go home but someone in the white mob tried to disarm them before they left, possibly even trying to wrestle away someone’s gun. A shot was fired, and then many, many shots. Over the next 16(ish) hours, white mob violence burned down 35 square blocks of Black Wall Street (at least 1250 homes), somewhere between 50-300 people died, many hundreds more were injured, and not a single criminal charge was brought to anyone. Also insurance companies refused to compensate the black families because obviously
Fast forward to 1996, and the city of Tulsa formed a committee to investigate the Massacre (only 75 years late). The committee found that the city was at least partially responsible and should (among other things) pay reparations to the few remaining geriatric survivors who would have been mere children at the time. The city refused to do follow their advice (even though they were the ones who MADE the committee in the first place) so a lawsuit was attempted. It was thrown out because the statute of limitations (which was only 2 years for a civil rights claim) had long since passed. Although the city DID give out some medals to the survivors as if they were fucking Olympic athletes or something and not the victims of a state-supported hate crime/murder spree
It’s another example in a very, VERY long list of American hypocrisy, broken promises, and racism that we refuse to even acknowledge on an official level. It’s kinda similar to modern-day Japan denying that they committed any war crimes during World War 2 despite the mountains of evidence to the contrary