>There's a slow burning genocide afoot
Sounds like you're inciting a call to violent action.
107 karma · joined May 10, 2022
Sounds like you're inciting a call to violent action.
Of course there is a question. The whole point is that "at war" isn't a binary state, hence "who is doing the shooting" being a gross oversimplification.
This is a gross oversimplification given that most soldiers don't do any shooting at all.
You've obviously never fired an automatic weapon in a data center.
This is interesting. Has there been a write up on this saga anywhere?
From the Ruby Ridge wiki:
"On August 21, 1992, six Marshals were sent to scout the area to determine suitable places away from the cabin to apprehend and arrest Weaver. The marshals, dressed in military camouflage, were equipped with night-vision goggles and M16 rifles. DUSMs Art Roderick, Larry Cooper, and William F. "Bill" Degan formed the reconnaissance team, while DUSMs David Hunt, Joseph Thomas, and Frank Norris formed an observation post (OP) team on the ridge north of the cabin.
At one point, Roderick threw two rocks at the Weaver cabin to test the dogs' reaction. The action provoked the dogs; Weaver's friend, Kevin Harris, and Weaver's 14-year-old son, Samuel ("Sammy"), emerged and followed the dog "Striker" to investigate. Harris and the younger Weaver said that they were hoping the dog had noticed a game animal as the cabin was out of meat. The recon team (Roderick, Cooper, and Degan) initially retreated through the woods in radio contact with the OP team, but later took up hidden defensive positions.
Later, the OP team and the Weavers claimed the dogs were alerted to the recon team in the woods after neighbors at the foot of the mountain started their pickup truck. The recon team retreated through the woods to a "Y" junction in the trails 500 yards (460 m) west of the cabin, out of sight of the cabin. Sammy and Harris followed Striker on foot through the woods while Randy, also on foot, took a separate logging trail; Vicki, Sara, Rachel, and baby Elisheba remained at the cabin. The OP team were anxious at first, but then relaxed. Randy encountered the Marshals at the "Y"; Roderick claimed to have yelled, "Back off! U.S. Marshal!" upon sighting Weaver, and Cooper said he had shouted, "Stop! U.S. Marshal!" By their account, Sammy and Striker came out of the woods about a minute later. When the Marshals' position was revealed by the dog "Striker", a yellow Labrador Retriever, DUSM Roderick shot the dog dead. Seeing this, Sammy Weaver reacted by shooting in the direction of Roderick. DUSM Cooper then shot towards Sammy Weaver and Kevin Harris, who both sought cover. Harris, once finding cover behind a tree stump, then returned fire with one unaimed shot, which eventually killed DUSM William Francis "Bill" Degan. Sammy Weaver, now retreating up a hill was then shot in the back and killed by DUSM Cooper."
It will be left as an exercise to the reader to determine if the above constitutes an "attempt to serve a warrant".
The point is for these materials to be widely available. Is there a "banned" book that isn't available on the internet for free? No.
*picking a side here will be left as an exercise to the reader
If they "came for" all the books in a particular library, you (as a parent) could check the book you wanted out from another library, or buy it from a bookstore, or download it from a sketchy drive link you find on google, or recover it from an airdrop of literary material dropped into your occupied zone.
These books are "banned" in the same way that Starbucks red cups are "banned" in July.
"Carl Spaatz, commander of U.S. Strategic Air Forces in Europe (USSTAF), responded on June 28[31] to 'complain that Crossbow was a 'diversion' from the main task of wearing down the Luftwaffe and bombing German industry' for the Combined Bomber Offensive, and to recommend instead that Crossbow be a secondary priority"
>Did you consider how strategical targets became such networks?
All your numbers and calculations are background noise when you can't keep your fundamental concerns coherent.
Edit: Let me say that I see where you're coming from--I get the concern about large, low inertia systems, the ww2 partisans, the need for self reliance. But that ship has sailed. Russia is currently beating the bricks off Germany with the Nordstream. Saudi Arabia has been 'a murdering and 'a terrorizing for the better part of a century on the basis of their petroleum reserves.
I buy that renewables won't pay for the whole party, but it's also undeniable that renewables, in their various and sundry forms, are much more evenly distributed (globally, if not locally) and are therefore much less prone to the kind of exploitative power structures that have already arrived. All other economic considerations aside.
More modules that can be replaced individually or used to diagnose a problem is a good thing.
If an ICE car had all the fuses in a locked box (which required replacing the whole thing when one burned out) you would correctly identify that as a negative for the end user.
I'm sure there were reasons why they went for the alternative at Tesla but "easy to work on" wasn't one of them.
Doesn't this just mean that whatever over current protection system is in place isn't user serviceable?
To ask the most relevant question--do you call it strange?
"In the days leading up to Russia's February invasion of Ukraine, Vladimir Putin gave a televised address that rejected the idea of Ukraine as an independent country. It never had the 'stable traditions of real statehood,' Putin said. Instead, modern Ukraine was 'entirely created by Russia or, to be more precise, by Bolshevik, Communist Russia.'
More than prelude and pretext for a bloody war, Putin's words echo the writings of a man who has proselytized this idea for almost three decades: Aleksandr Dugin. A Russian political philosopher, Dugin has been influential with Russian military and political elites — even with Putin himself."[0]
Dugin's textbook in question, translated from Russian:
"On the key question of Ukraine, Dugin underlines: 'Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning. It has no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness" (377). 'Ukraine as an independent state with certain territorial ambitions,' he warns, 'represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics' (348)"[1]
[0]:https://www.cbsnews.com/news/aleksandr-dugin-russia-ukraine-... [1]:https://web.archive.org/web/20160607175004/https://www2.gwu....
This is an empirical argument.
Is the upper bound of damage higher for nuclear reactors or fossil fuels?