Honestly, it’s worse, if you’re thinking of the Chappelle’s Show skit. At least the character Clayton Bigsby is also blind so he literally doesn’t know he’s actually white.
Honestly, it’s worse, if you’re thinking of the Chappelle’s Show skit. At least the character Clayton Bigsby is also blind so he literally doesn’t know he’s actually white.
How can that be a classic behaviour? For one, they haven’t done it, as illustrated by how hard they’ve cracked down on any facist behaviour since the cessation of WII. And wouldn’t they have had to have done it more than once for it to be a classic behaviour? They’ve literally been nazists once. They’d have to have been nazists more than once, and gone through the phases you’ve described for any normal person to call it a “classic”.
You know what is an example of a classic behaviour though? Internet “experts” who just trust what they’re given and don’t do any research about it. Like you’ve done. Want proof? Read the other reply to the comment you’ve replied to here. And if that’s not enough, explain to me why the German foreign minister hasn’t been jailed/charged/etc for these remarks. Never trust just one source.
Nah, it’s easy to imagine that. Multiplayer. The Nazi team wins. Swastikas everywhere. Pretty sure it’s why cod no longer has swastikas in multiplayer anymore (and if I’m remembering rightly, they kept it in the single player as they felt it wasn’t offensive as it is given with a hell of a lot of context that multiplayer rounds simply don’t have).
They don’t. Go and reread what I wrote, then come back here and quote the part of my comment where I said that.
And I again refer you back to what I previously wrote, your priorities change as you age. Mine did. I’m far more likely to have sex with a partner who’s company I enjoy than someone who’s company I don’t enjoy. That aside, I didn’t say you’re gonna just start solely having sex with only people you have good company with. I didn’t even say that you’d stop trying to have sex with people you were physically attracted to. I said your standards will change. Which insinuated that maybe you might not have slept with someone when you were 18yo cos they didn’t meet your criteria of being attractive back then, but you might now cos your standards have changed.
I’m already starting to have trouble with it. I’ve been perusing all on here cos the few communities I’ve found that fit my hobbies are pretty dead and I’m done with them for the day in less than 5mins. And being in all has exposed me to a shit load of ai porn. A lot is very obviously generated, but a lot of it also makes me double check what instance I’m on as it is super good at generating “real people” that look convincing. It’s not quite perfect, but it’s good enough to confuse me a little. Hell, there’s the odd one or two that I see where I legitimately can’t tell if it’s real or generated.
You’re still gonna be attracted to 20yos physically. There’s over 100k years of evolution that wants you to mate with the fittest, most attractive mate that you can. But is that a person you actually want to spend time with outside of the bedroom? So, yeah, your standards in regards to physical attractiveness are gonna drop as you age, but your other standards will likely change too.
deleted by creator
You don’t understand basic English comprehension.
Let’s break down your initial comment.
But if he was shooting pub goers
He wasn’t so the rest of your comment is irrelevant. He had shot pub goers, but he wasn’t when he was killed. He had been subdued. Don’t need to break down the rest cos it’s as useful as you are in general to society, not very.
The article says “after the shooting” the gunman was killed.
Pretty fucking clear to me. Note it doesn’t say “during” or any of its synonyms.
Okay, here’s some reading comprehension for you. The person you intially replied to made it clear that the death of the gunman happened after the gunman was subdued. They also said that appropriate force would be reasonable if he was actively shooting. You’ve basically repeated what they’ve said, trying to antagonise a response. It’s a shitty way to try and have a discussion, and I’m gonna call people out on this every day of the week. Be better.
deleted by creator
You know what else is common sense? Not commenting on a topic when you don’t have all the facts. How do you know the force was appropriate? Cos all I’m reading says that gunman appears to have been killed after he’d been subdued. Hence the charges.
Reading other articles, it sure sounds like the gunman was subdued and no longer a threat, then was killed. Not killed during the subduing as you are implying, but after it.
It happened 2weeks ago, that’s plenty of time for an investigation of some description to have occured. And reading elsewhere, it sounds like the gunman was subdued, then killed. And that certainly changes things.
cries in downloads such obscure stuff that I’m lucky if it has 2 or 3 seeds
Most places where you live. This isn’t a problem for the entire globe. Some of it, sure. But not all of it. I pay with hundreds all the time in Australia and noone gives a shit.
To be fair, Nelson Mandela was sorta a terrorist. He wasn’t as bad as his wife (she spoke at length about doing stuff like putting car tyres around enemies necks, filling the tyres with petrol, then lighting em up), but he did turn a blind eye to some pretty despicable shit that his supporters were doing. For a very long time Amnesty international didn’t support him. Personally, I think the reason he was ignoring these things was good, but the acts themselves sorta don’t justify it. But then, you have to do something to overthrow the oppressors and I’m a white male so I know I will never truly understand the motivations for these acts and can’t really judge anyone for em.
This fits this inatance on two levels, cos that’s New York from flavor of love.
Lol, I love it when people get all worked up and it turns out they are upset for idiotic reasons.
deleted by creator