Societal improvement is subjective so the question is really just would you force you views on others if you could?
Maybe if your beliefs were actually better you wouldn't need to force them upon others.
It's like that red button parable. Man gives you a box with a red button and says if you press the button you'll get a million dollars but somebody you don't know will die. You press the button and the man shows up with your million then gives the button to somebody you don't know. Ironic. You shouldn't do something to others you wouldn't want other people doing to you.
Also we already have this genie, and he's not even taking Soros' life in exchange for forcing a shitty Soros society on us.
You're conflating crime and jurisdiction.
A Thai citizen can have sex with a minor and he's neither a criminal nor under our jurisdiction. An American can go to Thailand and do the same and he's a criminal, but not under our jurisdiction (he'd have to voluntarily return or be extradited). A foreign diplomat can be under our jurisdiction but not a criminal for doing the same as an American.
So an alien having committed a crime doesn't mean they are under our jurisdiction ("subject to the jurisdiction thereof").
For example, what's the difference between a criminal alien unknown to the government who is still in the country vs one who has since returned home? From the government's perspective nothing is different - until the former is discovered and so becomes under our jurisdiction - which is effective just like if the one who returned was extradited back to face prosecution here.
Also, in America only "certain unalienable Rights" come from God/nature, not all rights. Citizenship is not inalienable; in fact naturalization is delegated to Congress by the Constitution.
"and subject to the jurisdiction thereof"
How exactly are they subject to our laws if they're criminal aliens unknown to the government? The only way to read that as supporting birthright citizenship is if jurisdiction is entirely geographical.
In the past they might have said it's lines on a map, but with today's court and environment I bet they find that illegals are not under our jurisdiction, but they'll split the baby and say any child of parents that filed for asylum or had a court date has birthright citizenship (so all the CBP One aliens and ones that pretended to need asylum).
Also this guy who's only publicly known feats were owning two small pizza shops was listed by WaPo as one of the 50 most influential people in Washington, the seat of power in one of the most powerful countries on Earth.
It was never explained why.
Sure it could have been that he was friends with the reporter that wrote the list and put in on a lark, or it could have been the mask slipping.
This is what the start of Kessler syndrome looks like, only in orbit so it's invisible.
Imagine a cloud of debris like this orbiting for years or decades, smashing into other satellites making their own debris clouds.
The progress SpaceX has made is great, but the downside is Elon is reckless and so this is what we're headed for. Hopefully when it happens (not if) it'll only be in low orbit where it'll resolve itself in a half dozen years or so and then everybody will work together to prevent it happening again.
[...] advance notice of wrongdoing
Threats? You mean threats? Fucking weasel ass language.
I don't think it's weasel language, I think it's just weird because it's translated from Japanese.
To me this reads like Japanese subway signs with 'no breakdancing' graphics.
I'm not even sure if this is DEI or against. Who is calling up support and bitching at staff? It's not the sane people that just want to play the game.
Small pox killed 30% at a time when handwashing didn't exist and indoor plumbing was a luxury.
It's a highly lethal virus and more transmissible that less lethal ones. So your point that "must necessarily" is hogwash.
From the biologist themselves
"Virulence evolution"
Already addressed. Jesus Christ it's like conversing with a trained monkey you're so retarded.
Radiation Detectors are not FISA warrants, brainlet.
Gov't looking at radiation coming from your person is no different than them looking at photons leaving your phone.
That you're still on gov't being the only threat is a testament to how unimaginative, uninformed, and unintelligent you are.
As a disease increases in lethality it must necessarily decrease in transmissibility because the transmission window decreases.
Absolute hogwash. Smallpox killed 30%+ and was very transmissible (R0 3.5-6.0) - and that's a natural disease subject to evolution not intelligently designed. The common cold is R0 2-3 range, so it's much more transmissible and more deadly than that.
I don't know where you get these patently absurd dogmas.
society isn't worth preserving. You just don't fucking get that.
Oh I get it. You believe "there needs to be a massive reduction in population" and society isn't worth preserving unless you can build mass destruction weapons in privacy.
In other words you are exactly the kind of person who should be monitored and kept track of by these agencies.
the problems with claiming that some lone wolf individual ... competent enough to recalculate all the explosive lenses
THEN transporting it to a target without setting off the radiation detectors
Buy a house in the city and build it there, not even to mention that "radiation detectors" are invading your privacy. Would you still support your same policy if people could use it to build civilization-ending weapons? "But they can't do that now".
You're one of those people who apparently can't understand hypotheticals - we'll never know how you'd feel if you didn't eat breakfast unless you actually skip breakfast that day.
I am absolutely ok with [my 'eccentric' neighbor working away in total privacy on his hobby nuclear bomb]
Well you're insane then. A nuclear bomb going off in a city is likely to end civilization.
You guys have apparently no concept of how close to armageddon we are. You should read up on history where one Soviet commander just refused to launch nuclear weapons even though he was trained and required to in response to an alert. These close calls have happened several times and that's with whole governments working to prevent them. Put that power into your random mental case and it's game over.
Also biological agents destroying America or other major power could easily lead to the end of civilization.
But even so you think with technology 200 years from now we're going to have the same privacy we do today? I sure hope not because we'll all be dead.
It's illegal for the agencies to spy domestically, in some cases, but it's not unconstitutional.
Only the law would need to change, which is why the agencies so badly want somebody who won't work to get the law to expire or be repealed.
I said "a" Great Filter situation.
It's possible for undetectable aliens to exist AND for us to extinct ourselves through technology or other mass destruction.
It's not a false premise at all, you're simply grasping for any means not to address the real issues (because you know I'm right).
I used homegrown smallpox as an example because it's a real possibility today, this moment. Are you're going to be okay with your 'eccentric' neighbor working away in total privacy on his hobby nuclear bomb, or would you insist something be done about that?
As I said initially, every year individuals become more powerful and so more dangerous to even civilization itself. At some point even a nuclear bomb will be an easy build, so your position surely cannot be "for all time". How long can we allow individuals to do whatever they want in private?
There's even a name for it working: parallel construction.
Of course it works. Believing the dogma that they haven't caught anybody is like saying "but torture doesn't work!" or "lie detectors don't work!". All of them work, in their own way, but not in some perfect strawman way you might want them to.
And it's only unconstitutional if it's "unreasonable" and they're searching your person, house, papers, or effects. Your internet electrons leave your vicinity and they're not your personal effects. Whether it's "unreasonable" is for society and the courts to decide.
Really it's a simple question, do you trust every capable person in the country not to produce and distribute smallpox or do any other way of mass destruction? If so then you're nuts, but ok. If you don't then you either somehow prevent crazies from acting out or you restructure society to protect against all likely events like that.
Or you do nothing and wait for your inevitable end.
If a vaccine immunity is going to last 10 years it'll last a lifetime, unless the specific cells in your bone marrow that remember the antibodies just happen to die - which can happen for many reasons. It's also possible to get vaccinated and not develop immunity (if injected into a vein instead of muscle for instance).
So they have people get tetanus 'boosters' that aren't really boosters just in case.
Lockjaw is a pretty bad way to go and the bacteria is everywhere in nature so personally I'd rather have peace of mind than the small risk not getting vaccinated again, but maybe you could do every 20 years instead of 10 or wait until you get a puncture wound.
My take is that James Lindsey was raised a liberal and like Jordan Peterson has all the same kind of irrational prejudiced hatred for anything right-wing and conservative.
In other words, he feels the left and the right are both Evil incarnate, but that the left 'should' be the good guys and have just gone down the wrong path and been corrupted by Marxism whereas the right are and always will be the bad guys.
In reality there are good and bad to all sides so it doesn't mean anything to say left or right is bad in general, but to talk specifics. Like the left's pushing of trannies and censorship is bad, but their not wanting people to have to live under a bridge from medical debt is good (it could be argued). Lindsey uses "woke right" to avoid these specifics and protect his ingrained right=bad views.
I can tell you every one of them says they believe it is needed because the IC tells them there are just too many domestic terror threats that need to be monitored.
It's a complicated issue, because as individuals get more destructive power some freedom has to be curtailed or we're in a Great Filter situation. The destructive power an individual today has vs somebody from say the 50s is immense, both from technology and information.
For example, right now any person in the country in their own home can print a smallpox virus using commercial available gene printers for a small amount of money that anyone who knows how can afford. It still takes some technical skill to accomplish, but not really that much.
Unfortunately the people keeping us safe (in government and Big Tech) are also techno fascists.
The real problem with spying on Americans is there's no real oversight to it. One solution is to have like a freedom of information act process where anyone can request information on anyone else, but the process is somewhat costly and open to curtail abuses.
Millennials were only the "poorest generation" in their early 20s then they catch up. I'm sure the same is true for younger kids.
A large reason for this is that their parents live longer so they inherit wealth later in life (especially true for super-wealthy that distort statistics like this).
Yes, the age expectancy has been mostly stable recently, but wealth now takes a long time to inherit and you should compare boomer's expectancy vs their parents' (boomers' parents lived 20 years less long vs parents of kids today living 10 years less'). In other words, millennials were inheriting wealth 10 years later than boomers did. Boomers' parents expectancy was about 50 years so their kids in their 20s were fairly likely to have inherited something already.
College loans are also a factor for kids in their 20s, but they're a much smaller one (about 1/10th from my rough estimate).
I think it's unintentionally confusing to mask the real problem: liberal women.
The presenter is a woman who went to a small liberal arts college and was director of USGS under Obama (a "first woman", yeah). All-girls primary schools. "Anyone who is doing anything in my life [before college] was female". Didn't take her husband's name. Thinks science has to change to accommodate women having children. No real talent for or self-direction in science, but gets elevated time after time just for being a woman.
On the other hand, she wants to be objective and pretend to be an actual scientist herself, so is personally conflicted and I think that plays out in this table - which is possibly the worst way to present this data.
If the data was presented clearly the audience would say "so... basically you're the problem?" and it would be personally embarrassing and hurtful.
Their rage blinds them to all foresight, because this and the other lawfare is a really dumb move for them in the long run.
They'll have to mention the "first convicted felon President" in school for decades to come and the first question from every kid will be "so.. what did he do?" and ones with any sense will know it's bullshit. Liberal teachers will either have to try to explain it and sound like dumb shits or ignore it and have the kids look it up themselves.
Even in future years if liberal teachers with cooler heads realize it's a red pill landmine it'll simply be impossible not to step on it.
Imagine being omniscient - all that queer degeneracy, you'd see all of it.
That's why I was always partial to Jonathan Edwards' god. Infinite sufferance begets infinite rage.
It's more than that. This is all they have.
They're rats clinging to a nazi-salute lifeboat.
Trump's approval rating is 53% among Democrats. The bubble Dems are so demoralized they'll take any win even if it's imaginary.