When many different women all have similar stories it is safe to say there is something afoot. These have come from both the UK and in Romania.
So no names? Nothing specific?
Attacks from the Tateliban brothers are exclusively directed at the state of Israel, they also send millions in aid to Hamas and Hamas aligned groups in the region.
Where did you find the information about their finances and donations? Can it be verified? You're claiming they directly sent funds to Hamas. How do you know, when did it happen, and how much?
Stop talking in vague terms. Give me specific facts.
From what I last heard, none of the women who accused the Tate brothers ever worked for them. They were all just false accusations from people they often did not even know. Could you be more specific about their alleged crimes? I'd like to know if there's been something more concrete since then. Do you have any name for any of these multitudes of women that you claim made accusations against them?
Also, it should be noted that although Andrew Tate himself is now calling himself a muslim, his brother is very openly a Christian. I don't think it'd be accurate to just label him as just another mudslime, with all the associations that usually come from that label.
And also, why would attacking Israel be any worse than attacks against any other country? With the amount of funding, resources and support they've been handed in the past several decades, they should be able to take care of themselves. They've clearly been far more interested in waging war than in diplomacy with their neighbours, from what I can tell. This is the result.
When I was in College, I was in a class called "world views". It was a class in the domain of "humanities" or "philosophy", and it was mandatory to get credits in a few of them.
So in one of the earlier classes, the teacher paired us in groups, and gave us a list of short descriptions of people. There was a scientist, a doctor, a pregnant woman, a baby, etc, and you had to classify them in the order in which you would save them from a fire, assuming that they were all passed out and you could only carry one at once. So we talked, and we rated them in an order. After that, the teacher added some more details to the characters. The scientist was a smoker, the baby had a birth defect, the pregnant woman was an alcoholic, etc, and you had to order them again, and then compare the two lists and explain your decisions to the class.
So there was this one guy, in one of the groups. Apparently, he argued and pushed extremely hard for the smoker to be basically dead last in his group's list, because he smoked. He was saying that he was already on the verge of death, that saving him would be pointless, and that he deserved to die. Well, as soon as the class finished, his group was really surprised when they saw him pull out a pack of cigarettes, place one on his ear, and then walk out.
The point of the anecdote is to say that you don't necessarily need to live in a certain way to be able to recognize and preach a different lifestyle than your own. I know basically nothing about the person you mentioned, but it could be the case for her. For me, I'm an atheist, but that doesn't mean that I can't recognize how horrible of an effect atheism has had on society, or that I can't recognize how much better off the West was when they shared a common set of values in the form of Christianism. I wish I still lived in a nation like that, even if I personally can't get myself to believe that a god exists.
I don't get it.
Sure, it's that retarded 4/20 celebration that they've been calling "weed day" or something for a couple years now.
And from the comments, it sounds like Germany legalized weed on that very day.
But so what? Germany is losing all that made it once great, becoming a leftist shithole that is doomed to fall apart under the policies of the former proud communist Merkel, and her actions of sabotaging nearly all opposing political parties that could have righted the ship for decades.
So why should current Germany legalizing weed detract from the enjoyment of stoners? Germany is one of them, now. Anyone who still associates its current state and its current culture to Nazis, is an idiot.
Am I missing something?
I know that had the South separated at the time, it would have been something like the world's third largest economy, which was the primary reason the North refused to allow them to secede (since they paid the majority of all federal taxes). But were Jewish bankers really so entrenched and influential even back then that they would have been able to influence most key figures into waging a civil war? Jews are overrepresented in most influential fields today because of generations of people engaging in rampant nepotism, but back in the 18th century, it just seems like they would have had less time to set that up.
Are you suggesting women are unified force?
Are you claiming they're not? No demographic on Earth has as much in-group bias as women, regardless of the jealousy creating resentment that makes them dislike their own. Women, by and large, follow the herd. As long as they feel the wind blowing in a direction, they will follow it.
I will agree, however, that the trans issue is unique in the fact that it has them divided. One of the only issues I can think of where they don't vote as a block. It will be interesting to see who will win between the TERFs and social media.
It only changed with the introduction of movies and television, resulting in actors' names becoming famous nation-wide and worldwide. They were little more than low-bro entertainers, before they were able to reach a far wider audience.
Construct nuclear power plants, get enough power to desalinize and purify industrial quantities of seawater, and problem solved. Just stop wasting time on dead-end ventures like overly relying on "renewable" energy. (With the exception of geothermal, hydroelectricity and tidal power plants, as those actually have potential in the right environments.)
Why the hell should Musk care about the dictates of such an insignificant, petty tyrant from fucking Brazil? When's the last time he even bothered to visit that crime-ridden country? Any "criminal investigation" they do is nothing more than a meaningless performance, when they have not the authority or power to actually apply any fines on him.
Good on Musk for not backing down.
A child is always a gift and never the basis of a commercial contract.
This sounds like a rather clear condemnation of abortion and alimony/child support. I wonder why he didn't bother to specify that he was against those practices.
Moreover, acknowledging the dignity of the human person also entails recognizing every dimension of the dignity of the conjugal union and of human procreation.
As long as no-fault divorce exists and there remains no penalties for breaking your holy sworn vows of loyalty and support until death, as long as the union can be freely broken for cash and prizes, there exists no "dignity" in the "conjugal union". It's nothing more than a thin façade, easily ignored when convenient.
Although I tend to have a somewhat dim view of homosexual couples, I don't really have anything against allowing them to make use of a surrogate mother or a sperm donor, in the case of lesbians. I strongly condemn paedophilia, and hope that any "parents" of children who catch monkey pox are flayed and hung in the town square, and I recognize that children raised by homosexual parents will very likely have a far less balanced upbringing than those raised by both a mother and a father, but I still don't overly mind them hiring the services of someone from the opposite sex to enable them to have children who are related by blood. Their children will not necessarily turn into degenerates, as long as the parents aren't too far gone themselves.
And as far as I'm concerned, surrogacy contracts are a legitimate agreement between consenting adults, and a good option for women to earn money when they are not actively working a full-time job. It is up to them to decide whether they are willing to carry a child that they will have no part in raising, along with the restrictions that they will have to impose upon themselves during the duration of the pregnancy, such as no smoking, no alcohol, no drugs, and having a balanced diet. Since the concept of a "holy matrimony" has been extinct from the Western world for so many decades, I disagree with him that surrogacy is a practice that should be banned.
Without reading the article, what's wrong with surrogacy? As a man, if I wanted children, this would definitely a way that I would consider going about it. Pay a woman to have my child, likely conceived through in-vitro fertilization, and have her renounce all claims to parentage for it. And then potentially find a long-term girlfriend or wife, now that they would have no claim whatsoever over the child and wouldn't be able to threaten me with taking them away from me for cash and prizes.
I don't care much for Christiano Ronaldo, but I will always respect him for going about it this way. He knew that as a millionaire (or is he a billionaire?), women would try to parasitize him for his money through any means necessary, so he took steps ahead of time to avoid the worst case scenario.
And how many years ago was that? At least 3, surely?
But yeah, I guess that the reason I haven't heard about him in a while is because what he's been involved in would just be things I'm not interested in, since I don't typically tend to hang around gay bars and bathhouses or twitter
Do they call them "cp1", "cp2", "cp3", etc, or just "cp"? Because one makes it more obvious than the other.
Also, there is a difference between writing "cp" in the in-game chat where the context makes it obvious what you mean, compared to writing it in a tweet where many people won't know what you meant. Especially if the only contextual clue you give them about your abbreviation is that you specifically mention the subject is controversial.