1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

Frankly, I don't think the situation is actually that bad. We just don't assert ourselves. The moment we take even minor steps in our own defense; the sham comes tumbling down.

It reminds me of that week where it looked like the Tories in the UK had enacted the Rwanda plan successfully. Suddenly, for a whole week, there were zero boats crossing the channel. And all that was was the fear of paying people to go to Africa.

I genuinely don't think it would take much effort to make most of the chancers leave, this is mostly because we are paying them all to come. If we wanted, we don't even need a deportation program. We just have to stop paying them.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

People like what Punisher stands for and that's why he is so popular. 95% of the people putting his Emblem up haven't read a single comic book other than a page someone shared on Facebook.

That's basically the entire US military.

It's from that kind of cynical view I mentioned. "Man's Wrath" rather than "God's Wrath". When there can be no real justice, and there are no real heroes, all that can be done is punishment.

When you are military, you can tell that there is no justice in anything in war. War is inherently unjust. The mechanisms of justice can only exist in peace, and in the worst cases, it looks like even God might have abandoned man. In such a case, where justice can only come from power, and power can only come from the barrel of a gun, then the only justice is to kill the bad guy before he makes another victim. Bringing his unrelenting terror and slaughter to an end is the closest thing to justice you can achieve. As such, this is the mentality of the Punisher, which is why so many sympathize with it.

4
Gizortnik 4 points ago +4 / -0

Glen Greenwald doesn't gatekeep the right. He's a Socialist.

Check his opinions on Venezuela and Brazil if you're not sure. He's got a lot of Leftist friends down there supporting and funding him. He's probably a designated, anti-CIA, Leftist. His interests in South America just don't really require any sort of loyalty to most American leftists.

0
Gizortnik 0 points ago +1 / -1

Honestly, I think the ones that are not feds and Leftist double-agents, are actually Qatari shills.

A lot of the pro-Hamas propaganda that they've spewed is exactly identical to the shit you hear coming out of Al-Jazeera, and has a strong Leftist flavor to it.

It's fucking weird seeing a NatSoc talking about "oppression" and "colonization", but they've done it.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +2 / -1

Honestly: potentially.

We actually ask them not to because they are so much more likely to create a worse international situation that it isn't worth the trouble to have their help.

Hell, we ask Jordan for help from time to time and we normally get it. I don't see why Israel wouldn't help... if asked.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +2 / -0

Of course he does.

Honestly, every single person who works with AIPAC needs to be registered as a foreign agent (as 'Minecraft' Massie suggested).

Why do we have to even play this game? It would be more honest if Mossad just showed up as Mossad. I can respect a spy, not a subversive.

This by Telia
0
Gizortnik 0 points ago +1 / -1

No white person has a moral responsibility for paternalism or maternalism of other races. Frankly, no one of any race does.

And to be clear, the Pope protected child rape, and Mother Teresa tortured kids for her own ideology and incompetence through negligent treatment.

These are bad people exploiting the fetishes of unmarried, single, white women who want babies; but never built up a relationship to have their own children; and have instead allowed this personal failure to be both politicized and racialized (which is a level of sickness that is hard to fathom).

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +2 / -0

That is the goal. Then they try to make it cannon to maintain the conquest of the medium.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +2 / -0

Where "The Shadow" was effectively God's wrath, "The Punisher" is effectively man's wrath.

I suppose that it's not true justice, it's compromised justice in a fundamentally unjust world.

Where Batman hoped to destroy the corruption of Gotham with Harvey Dent and Commissioner Gordon; the Punisher would just shoot the cops. If your system won't tolerate ethical men, then an unethical man is the blowback against the system that it can't control.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

Robots are the definition of a "Capital Investment":

"Here is the procedure. Do it forever."

"OK"

If there is any variance in any scope of this situation, the robot will produce poor results.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's how you would make a deal. Big talk, reasonable compromise.

He will try to make them into Americans, despite them showing how little they want that.

I would rather them be Americans too. The thing is, I suspect that most of them are so fundamentally interested in money rather than subversion, most of them will simply leave when pressure is put on them (either by recession or by policy).

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

No, but I warned everyone that the best way to defeat Trump was to work with him. A lot of people said that he's super vengeful, but I haven't really seen it.

He's trying to craft a deal, but he's still a 90's Democrat. He's the best spear we have to break the system to make long term change, but the change is going to be, by definition, long term.

7
Gizortnik 7 points ago +7 / -0

If his wife was going to do that, he would never have become the Punisher when she died.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +2 / -0

Each part of this is literally 100% true.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

That baby had a gun and was coming right for me.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

Tell them to celebrate their abortions, and do not stop.

It's like saying they are as beautiful as Lizzo.

Push their bullshit back int their mouth.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not even. Even if something was sold to, let's call them an 'ethnic' Argentinian, you'd call it "selling it to foreigners" because it wasn't owned by the state.

NatSoc.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

This should be inscribed in stone.

"No computer makes a decision"

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think your failing to see the point that a major portion of "AI" is just straight up not AI or ML, and is literally just people lying about what the programmers would have built anyway.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

I've seen people try to build code with AI as if it were a natural language software. Because the AI still doesn't understand what it's actually supposed to do, people have basically taken the same amount of time to fix it as they would have if they had just built it correctly in the first place.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

AI is effectively just 1,000 Indian programmers typing away without context.

AI is also literally 1,000 Indian programmers typing away without context in at least one occassion.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

100%.

AI is a bubble. Most "AI" isn't even Machine Learning. They are barely functional pattern-recognition algorithms at best.

I have explicitly called out vendors whom have thrown "AI" as a buzzword at me, and the moment it was clear that I knew what I was talking about, they immediately said, "Yeah, it's not AI".

half of the industry hasn't worked out how to test database backups regularly.

GETTA LOAD OF THIS GUY!

HE THINKS THERE ARE BACKUPS!

WHAT AN IDIOT!

I'm not even sure most people have a test environment.

2
Gizortnik 2 points ago +2 / -0

Just because you consider private ownership by Argentinians and de-nationalization to be "selling out to foreigners" doesn't make it true. It just makes you a pinko.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm sorry that I didn't get back to this, but it's important so this is a quite delayed reply.

So, fundamentally, this starts with Hitler asserting the "Shrinking Markets" theory of economics (an archaic socialist economic concept). TL;DR Tik's 40 minute video: Hitler was certain that in order for Germany to stay industrialized and avoid a judeo-bolshevist revolution from bread riots that would be the result of an industrialized Eastern Europe no longer needing to export food to Germany to get refined goods; Germany would have to conquer Eastern Europe to have a functioning Autarkey (an archaic socialist economic concept of "total economic self-sufficiency / no longer needing outside trade), keep the East permanently under-industrialized to maintain food shipments to Germany and prevent a judeo-bolshevist revolution.

So, just to be clear: Hitler already assumes he will have an inevitable food crisis from the outset.

Once in power, the NSDAP's centralized agricultural economic policies that rewarded "traditional" farming methods tended to not only produce inefficiency from bureaucracy and mismanagement, but lower yields than could have been achieved without the policies in place. Goebbels explicitly mentioned struggles with food problems very badly between 1941-1943.. If his diary is to be believed, the situation is so bad even by 1941, that occupied territories are being unintentionally starved, including in France and Belgium. He makes an interesting comment that rations in Germany have to be adjusted because "even the Bolsheviks left one cow to a farmer." Some of the old members of the Social Democratic Party (the old Weimar boys), complained about the mismanagement too (thinking they would have managed everything better just like every other Socialist ever has). The German military was utterly infamous for plundering the hell out of Eastern Europe, especially stealing food supplies in order to quell the on-going food crisis in Germany, causing intentional famines basically everywhere they went, critically in Greece.

The Holocaust presents a unique solution to the Food crisis. Killing jews certainly prevents the Judeo-Bolshevist revolution that Hitler claims is inevitable. However, starving jews or other undesirable populations to free up food-stuffs for Germany is a major benefit. Even if you can't increase the yield of a Polish farm, if you decrease the population of the country by several million, you're going to have much more food on-hand to import back to Germany. This also goes for Russian POW's.

Basically, Socialist policies guaranteed that Germany would suffer famines that it couldn't prevent. So they instead responded to the hunger in Germany by introducing theft & depopulation policies literally everywhere else.

1
Gizortnik 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm sorry that I didn't get back to this, but it's important so this is a quite delayed reply.

So, fundamentally, this starts with Hitler asserting the "Shrinking Markets" theory of economics (an archaic socialist economic concept). TL;DR Tik's 40 minute video: Hitler was certain that in order for Germany to stay industrialized and avoid a judeo-bolshevist revolution from bread riots that would be the result of an industrialized Eastern Europe no longer needing to export food to Germany to get refined goods; Germany would have to conquer Eastern Europe to have a functioning Autarkey (an archaic socialist economic concept of "total economic self-sufficiency / no longer needing outside trade), keep the East permanently under-industrialized to maintain food shipments to Germany and prevent a judeo-bolshevist revolution.

So, just to be clear: Hitler already assumes he will have an inevitable food crisis from the outset.

Once in power, the NSDAP's centralized agricultural economic policies that rewarded "traditional" farming methods tended to not only produce inefficiency from bureaucracy and mismanagement, but lower yields than could have been achieved without the policies in place. Goebbels explicitly mentioned struggles with food problems very badly between 1941-1943.. If his diary is to be believed, the situation is so bad even by 1941, that occupied territories are being unintentionally starved, including in France and Belgium. He makes an interesting comment that rations in Germany have to be adjusted because "even the Bolsheviks left one cow to a farmer." Some of the old members of the Social Democratic Party (the old Weimar boys), complained about the mismanagement too (thinking they would have managed everything better just like every other Socialist ever has). The German military was utterly infamous for plundering the hell out of Eastern Europe, especially stealing food supplies in order to quell the on-going food crisis in Germany, causing intentional famines basically everywhere they went, critically in Greece.

The Holocaust presents a unique solution to the Food crisis. Killing jews certainly prevents the Judeo-Bolshevist revolution that Hitler claims is inevitable. However, starving jews or other undesirable populations to free up food-stuffs for Germany is a major benefit. Even if you can't increase the yield of a Polish farm, if you decrease the population of the country by several million, you're going to have much more food on-hand to import back to Germany. This also goes for Russian POW's.

Basically, Socialist policies guaranteed that Germany would suffer famines that it couldn't prevent. So they instead responded to the hunger in Germany by introducing theft & depopulation policies literally everywhere else.

view more: Next ›