Notices by nicholas_saunders (nicholas_saunders@mastodon.social), page 2

@br00t4c American gladiator. Ninja?

Some sort of #cagematch

@br00t4c

Color me skeptical that the man has a doctrine.

@br00t4c no limbs?

@br00t4c no, sobriety is far more dangerous.

Until you start seeing the #lizardpeople , of course.

@br00t4c color me skeptical that this was the first or last time she signed an NDA for a similar circumstance.

@br00t4c WTF

@br00t4c

"...deriding his independent rival Robert F Kennedy Jr..."

#falsedichotomy

@br00t4c

Just as Biden can only defeat Trump, Trump can only defeat Biden.

Fucking anyone can beat both of them. The ballot is rigged with this false dichotomy.

In this day and age we don't need a ballot. That ballots function is to limit choice.

@br00t4c I always thought he was a fairly normal dude.

@mcv @drewdevault @GI_Jack right...but why would anyone else contribute, just to help a competitor?

The gpl may be hated, but it protects those contributions.

@GI_Jack @drewdevault I never understood the Apache license. From a business perspective, yes, you get free labor. But why would an individual provide that free labor being fully cognizant that their contribution can be stolen?

@2ndStar @HistoPol @Darryl @jeff bizzare that these maroons who cannot hold an argument are more than willing to spill Ukrainian blood for a NATO membership?

Yeh. It's revolting. Chicken hawks.

@Darryl @2ndStar @HistoPol @jeff I don't know enough about Socrates to understand the jab, but probably not. Would you continue the war to gain entry to NATO?

I'd suggest this to be one of the more pointless wars because it could be negotiated. There in fact was a peaceful solution in place at one point.

But Socrates was like a warrior poet or something? I am more familiar with Socratic method, and logic. But no expert.

Arguably, we're spilling Ukrainian blood by continuing the war.

@louis @ViXY_DBC @RememberUsAlways see, here's the thing: vixy, under no circumstances, would ever acknowledge the indigenous rights of Jews.

Vixy will, undoubtedly, acknowledge the rights of any indigenous but Jews.

@KeesD92 @f800gecko @other_ghosts @palestine so, your premise would seemingly be that Israel wants to hinder humanitarian aid, and you would also gloss over any moral or legal obligations to ensure that such aid only reaches civilians.

@other_ghosts @f800gecko @palestine Certainly we all look forward to the ICJ investigation, although it sounds more like the ICC would have jurisdiction, but what's notable here is that you cannot conceive of the possibility that anyone was ensuring that humanitarian aid only reaches civilians. Much less the legal and moral obligations in regard to that concern, of which I certainly don't recall your acknowledgment.

@RD4Anarchy @thetechtutor @aral

Where you write "...face the truth of what Israel is doing," you don't specify what military action would've been legal following the #AlAqsaFlood operation.

@RD4Anarchy @thetechtutor @aral so absolutely no response as to what military action following the #alaqsaflood operation would've been either legal or moral, then.

@RD4Anarchy @thetechtutor @aral

Where you write that "focusing specifically on a hypothetical response to that particular event alone ignores the long history of Israel's occupation...," you've both dodged the moral question of:

What military action following the #AlAqsaFlood would've met with your personally high moral standards?

As well as setting the context as not just as Arafat has sought, but what now South Africa would seek.

@RD4Anarchy @thetechtutor @aral I asked you one question. One.

You declined to answer on either a moral or legal basis.

Here is the question:

What military action would've been legally or morally acceptable to your high standards following the #AlAqsaFlood operation?

You've dodged this question.

It's a very reasonable question. Your inability to form a coherent reply isn't terribly interesting.

No nations. No borders. That's not an answer but a dodge.