While it’s understandable that you might think so, that’s not where this is coming from.

The white poppy comes from the UK originally where they treat Remembrance Day rather differently from the way we do. While in Canada, it’s a moment to remember the horrors of war and the millions lost when we embrace industrial scale international violence, the UK really doubles down on the whole “To Our Glorious Dead” thing. They take the day to recognise the sacrifices “for freedom” and other deeply propagandistic ideas.

So in rejection of this, the white poppy came about as a rejection of this messaging. In a way, it’s an effort to make Remembrance Day more how Canadians tend to recognise it.

If the white poppy is now appearing in Canada, it might be in answer to how the day is changing culturally.

Source: I was born and raised in Canada. My grandfather fought in our armed forces to liberate the Netherlands and we attended Remembrance Day ceremonies regularly as far back as I can remember. I emigrated to the UK when I was in my 30s, and I will not wear a poppy here. It means something very different.

I don’t know why I care so much to try to inform you when you can’t even be bothered to google israelis destroy food, but here you go:

• BBC: Israeli protesters block aid trucks destined for Gaza
• The Guardian: ‘Total outrage’: White House condemns Israeli settlers’ attack on Gaza aid trucks

Then there’s the case where Israel targetted and killed aid workers just trying to deliver food. Again from the BBC: Biden ‘outraged’ over Israel strike on World Central Kitchen staff in Gaza.

Not satisfied with mainstream media that’s often biased in favour of genocide? Here is video footage of Israelis straight-up destroying food destined for Gazan children.

You say you’ve “been there”. I assume you mean Israel and not Gaza. Maybe, if you’re so confident that Israel are the good guys here, you should go back and help get those aid trucks through the Israeli blockades. Maybe you should try to stop the soldiers from gunning down people trying to collect flour from the few trucks that do get through.

You might be thinking something outlandish like: “It must be Hamas. Some sort of deep-cover thing where they’re killing their own people to implicate the Most Moral Army In The World”, and honestly, if you’re that far gone, there’s no helping you. I’m not going to sit here though and let you repeat lies unchallenged. Israel has – in the words of its own ministers, besieged Gaza. It’s so bad that even Biden has demanded that they let aid trucks through.

You are misinformed. I encourage you to learn more about the country you’re defending.

You are misinformed. The food trucks are not from Israel. They are being blockaded by Israel and the food destroyed. There’s ample evidence for this. They film themselves doing it.

I’m reasonably sure that the size of the monitor doesn’t matter, but the resolution does. If you run your monitor at 720p, the performance should be the same as the Deck locally. If you try to run it at 4k (I’m not even sure how you’d convince the Deck to do that) it would decrease performance considerably.

Agreed. Especially in Canada where we have a Liberal party it’s quite annoying!

Whether you like it or not, politics is into you and directly affects your life. It’s good to learn more about it.

“Neoliberal” refers to an economic push (typically championed by right-wing parties). The short explanation is that neoliberal proponents want to strip regulation wherever they can, believing that “the market” will provide what the regulations were guaranteeing (safety, competition, etc.) organically.

An extreme example would be removing any controls on food safety. The idea is that if a company gets a reputation for producing toxic/dangerous food, the market (ie, the people buying food) will naturally avoid that company because they don’t want to get sick and that company will go out of business. That risk is what keeps them in line.

A more common example is vehicle emissions. We regulate a lot of terrible stuff out of car exhaust — lead for example — because the market refused to do it themselves.

Opponents to neoliberalism point out that:

1. The massive amount of money in the hands of corporations means that their ability to manipulate the market (through advertising, media manipulation, or intimidating/buying their competitors) means that the market is insufficiently free for such policies and…
2. That (perhaps most importantly) the individual often will not make purchasing decisions based on what’s good for the broader public.

Also, a few thousand dead kids due to some executive deciding to add arsenic to corn flakes to reduce costs is too high a price to pay for “liberalising” the economy.

5-over-1 refers to a building/zoning design where you have one floor of commercial business space on the ground (typically small businesses, cafés, etc.) and then around 5 floors of residential apartments above it. Your classic “mixed use” neighbourhood: great for land values, walkability, sustainability, transit, cycling, etc.

I’m dubious about the claim that neoliberal policies naturally lead to this design though, as those with the money routinely seem more interested in paving a few hectares of green belt and filling it up with single family homes.

What would be helpful is for zoning bylaws to start redrawing cities with more 5-over-1 areas, replacing wide/noisy/dirty/dangerous through roads with narrow winding ones and broad sidewalks littered with trees and cafés.

Filed under “Ties that inexplicably existed in the first place”.

Israel has worked very hard to build that assumption everywhere it can, driving home that a lack of support for anything Israel does is somehow antisemitic. They use people like your wife as a shield for their crimes and a disturbing portion of her community is cheerleading their genocide.

They are doing this in her name, whether she “cares about politics” or not, so I would suggest she get out there with her community and remind the world that Israel does not speak for her.

Or just to bring the housing prices down for them to afford.

Please tell me that your username is a reference to Rainbow Rangers. My 5 year old daughter would be tickled pink.

I think what he’s missing is that he’s approaching the question of “how do I make these people care?” from a liberal position. It just seems like such a weird question to even ask someone who cares about others by default.

If you think of it from the perspective of a self-centred conservative though, you can ask the question as “how can I frame the pain of others as their problem?”

Try talking about solutions in a way that affects them personally:

• You want transit and bike lanes 'cause nothing reduces traffic other than viable alternatives to driving. Get those other people off the road so you can drive.
• You want to stop sending weapons to Israel because we’re spending your money on weapons for their war.
• You want to divest from fossil fuels because renewables have better energy security. Your costs don’t go up whenever those people start a war over there.
• You want high taxes on the rich because they’re festering parasites sleeping on a pile of gold and we want to spend that money on the poor so they aren’t so desperate that they steal your shit.

These people do not (cannot?) care about how many children are killed by our bombs or about the fate of some bird, so constantly appealing to emotional arguments meant for liberals will never work on them.

Yeah this isn’t a conversation we can have. If you’re going to sit there and deny the international criminal court and somehow accept the killing of tens of thousands of children, many by sniper fire like it’s comparable to bad tax policy then there’s no hope for you.

This is lovely. Thanks for sharing!

So here’s the thing. If someone is going to say with a straight face that they “stand with Israel”, even when Israel is committing genocide in their name, then those people are effectively throwing in their lot with genociders and frankly I have little sympathy for them. Thankfully, nearly every Jew I’ve ever met has been very critical of Israel (including the Israeli citizens), many of which have confessed zero interest in an ethnostate, preferring a liberal democracy with no state religion. A secular state for both Jews and Muslims – from the river to the sea if you will.

These people may well be the minority, but you’ll forgive me if I won’t accept the assumption that the majority of the 15 million Jews around the world support genocide. Call me a naïve optimist if you like, but I want to believe that most people are better than that.

Actually, this is one of the things that drives me crazy about Jesse’s take on this. Putting aside for the moment the base selfishness that would lead someone to ask: “how does your committing genocide affect me?”, he’s taking Israel’s position from the start that their actions are directly tied to the lives of Jews around the world. There are millions of Jews out there who are (a) not Israeli citizens, (b) are not Zionists, and © even actively condemn its actions purportedly in their name, but Jesse always starts with the position that Jews == Israel.

It’s Israel’s favourite shield: to claim that their actions are linked to Jews everywhere. They use it to smear any opposition to their war crimes as antisemitism, and lines of questioning like this only reinforce this link. You just can’t bemoan how Jews are being linked to war crimes while starting from the position that Israel is inherently linked to Jewish identity. What you get is a conversation where both parties agree that Israel is both inexorably linked to Jews everywhere but that they’re also not responsible for their safety because they can’t be – they’re not Israelis.

To put it another way, no one would do an interview with the Iranian ambassador and suggest that they’re somehow responsible for Islamophobia in Canada. That would be absurd, but because it’s in Israel’s interest to claim representation of all Jews everywhere, you get this ridiculous session where both parties agree on a distorted version of reality. Since journalism is supposed to be about distributing factual information, beginning an interview on such a flawed position is both illogical and irresponsible.

The former.

Responsible journalism is more than simply showing up for an interview and broadcasting whatever lie the subject wants you to share for them. If he’s not going to fact-check the ambassador immediately, then he’s operating as a defacto mouthpiece for his subject. Attaching a fact-checking document, after the fact, in an entirely different medium that outlines just how much of the interview was obvious propaganda is not journalism.

The worst part is that Jesse has levelled this very criticism in the past against other journalists! Specifically in reference to how Trump is covered, but others as well. You can’t just hand your mic, your platform over to a 3rd party and claim that you’re doing journalism when you’re really being complicit in the distribution of propaganda.

deleted by creator

The very existence of that scathing fact check document should have ensured that this episode was never published.

Five bucks says that this has nothing to do with general energy for the grid and everything to do with powering the fossil fuel extraction and processing industry in that region.