Kyoshi

Double post.

^Just wanted to add they've even brought out Hilary Clinton and her husband, and the former is not having a good time of it. She got heckled pretty brutally. There's a million plans right now and none of them look particularly good.

1 hour ago, The Grey Wolf Strikes Back said:

@Kyoshi

Ramadan this year starts in a few weeks (March 10 IIRC), not a few days.

I know. I guess 20+ days for me qualifies as a few since it's less than a month, especially in this context (it has surely factored into why Israel is trying to fast track the Rafah invasion. I don't imagine they want to be dropping bombs during Islam's holiest month).

EDIT: The point I'm trying to make Is, it seems like everyone is running around a bit more hastily right now. Blinken spends half his time in North Africa and the Middle East, and it feels especially rushed. Biden tried to talk with Muslum leaders and got turned down, now he's taking with the king of Jordan, who I think previously rebeffed him too ... its like DNC had an emergency meeting and decided, "okay, from now on we're going to do EVERYTHING. we need the Arab/Muslim vote back as soon as possible." And as a result, no plan is particularly refined. They're all just throwing stuff at the wall with the hope it will stick because there's some fast approaching deadline i.e. Ramadan. So yeah ... maybe not a few days, but soon enough to qualify as "too soon."

Apologies for grammar errors. Typing on my stupid phone.

2 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

There’s a book called Nathaniel’s Nutmeg: The Spice Trader who Changed History, that looks interesting. The Dutch eventually killed Captain Nathaniel, but the events leading to his death also led to the trade for Manhattan.

Sailors weren’t allowed to have pockets in their clothes, in case they stole some of the nutmeg.

Will check this when I have the time. Thanks for the recommendation.

47 minutes ago, Zorral said:

In yesterday's NYTimes little piece with many photographs of the tiny island of Indonesia which was the source of the vastly lucrative nutmeg trade back in the day (17th - 18th Centuries), 

Manhattan or Pulau Rhun? In 1667, Nutmeg Made the Choice a No-Brainer.
Growing a spice once worth its weight in gold, a tiny isle in Indonesia was so coveted that the Dutch traded Manhattan for it. Some 350 years later, life on the two islands couldn’t be more different.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/09/world/asia/indonesia-pulau-rhun-nutmeg.html

If you cut&paste this into a new tab, you can see this photo --

https://static01.nyt.com/images/2024/02/04/multimedia/00Indonesia-Nutmeg-Dispatch-08-vpjh/00Indonesia-Nutmeg-Dispatch-08-vpjh-articleLarge.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp&disable=upscale

Which is captioned:

"Most people get around by walking along the paved footpaths and steep stairways, often toting plastic jugs of water from the numerous village wells."

I've kind of been following the election build-up (because everyone is having an election this year for some reason), and one segment** focused on how kids in some of the poorer islands/villages/provinces go to school, and it kind of broke my heart, mostly because it looked so familiar (I'm rural South African).

**it was on the news so I unfortunately don't have a link. But the top 3 candidates are all running on education, and each aspect is maybe as important as the next, but each one is so neglected, they can be split into three separate campaign footholds.

On 2/7/2024 at 8:36 PM, Zorral said:

 We can only speculate, unless somebody who has the power who knows tells us, I guess. 

Not saying that I know for sure-sure, but it seems other Muslim and Arab nations were trying to unseat SA as the Muslim/Arab "leader nation," especially after the war in Yemen. SA flexed its muscles and the mutiny didn't happen, but South Africa** being the country to take Israel to court, as opposed to a majority Arab or Muslim nation, was very embarrassing I'd say. There's no doubt in my mind that Saudi Arabia's current position has nothing to do with morality or brotherly love towards Palestine. They're trying to save face. Also, American arrogance and militarism has not helped. It's also Ramadan in a few days; normalisation RIGHT NOW is an absolutely terrible idea; the whole world is watching, especially the Muslim and Arab worlds. Saudi Arabia needs to wash its image a little. But I expect they'll come back to the table once things die down.

**Chile, Mexico and Indonesia also having their own cases is making things worse. Palestine has really been abandoned by their "brothers," only Indonesia and Yemen stand with them in "word and deed," and they're not very powerful either. Yemen is still coming out of its own tragedy. So really, the question has been, for a very long time, where is the Arab world in all of this? More specifically, where is Saudi Arabia? Why are they allowing this?

^congratulations!

Yeah no, I'm not taking this bait again.

8 minutes ago, Zorral said:

 

Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley called on Republicans to stop short of giving women the "death penalty" for abortions.

 

 

"So what should we do? I think we find consensus. Can't we agree to ban late-term abortions?" she asked. "And can't we agree that no state law should say to a woman that if she has an abortion, she's going to jail or get the death penalty."

"VEEP is a documentary."

Although, one can't be sure if it's about Harris or Haley.

8 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Calling Jews neo-Nazis is the height of fucked up. 

I figured since we were engaging in reductive, intentionally nonsensical, ad hominem  arguments, I may as well give it my all.

59 minutes ago, Clueless Northman said:

These are countries whose governments would believe anything Israel told them, or at least would pretend to believe anything, and act accordingly, the same way you'd expect North Korea, Iran or Syria to believe anything Putin says about Ukraine. Or, to be blunt, Western countries are basically doing a blatant act of political whataboutism.

Exactly this.

It's truly frustrating to watch so-called politically-literate people just ignore all of that. Of course Israel has been investigating UNRWA for months. I expect that they investigate literally every aid agency in Gaza and the West Bank on principle. The Hamasification of Palestine is intentional because it always provides the US, UK and all the others with the cover of, "but what if we're actually funding terrorists?" That's why these "But Hamas ... but Hamas ... but what about Hamas" arguments are especially circular. Someone on Twitter said it best, its like cutting off funding to the NHS because of Lucy Letby. It's collective punishment, it's punitive, and if the ICJ didn't make that ruling, would this investigation have yielded these supposed terrorists?

25 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Seriously... Only missed neo-Nazis. 

That should have been implied. Naturally.

38 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I think anyone who uses ‘settler colonial ethno-fascist apartheid theocracy’ in a sentence with a straight face should be treated as a parody and given the respect it deserves. 

Since you continued to deliberately miss the point, it seemed apt to be as ham-fisted as possible. I'm glad it finally landed.

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Well there never was any claim that Hamas beheaded 40 babies. Even the 40 number relates to children being carried around on gurneys, and was made by just one journalist.

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/its-important-to-separate-the-facts-from-speculation-what-we-actually-know-about-the-viral-report-of-beheaded-babies-in-israel-12982329

Again it doesn’t seem that Israel has ever made any claims of beheaded babies, there are no public statements of the kind. This more a case of viral content over social media.
 

Either way, it doesn’t make much difference, because the scale and horror of the Hamas attack was appalling. Children were murdered and kidnapped. Anyone quibbling over whether babies were murdered or just beheaded really need to look inside themselves as what point they are trying to make. 

again, you're being deliberately disingenuous. i have looked inside myself and the point i'm trying to make is simply this - israel is a settler colonial ethno-fascist apartheid theocracy that propagates propaganda in an effort to justify its genocidal actions. i hope that's clear enough.

7 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Well there seems to be enough information and evidence provided for a host of countries to cut ties and pause funding with the UNRWA, so it's unlikely it's just nothing.
 

And yet babies were murdered by Hamas, it really doesn't matter if they were beheaded or not. Anyone bringing this up as some sort of moral point is just a terrible person.

You're being deliberately disingenuous here. You know it makes a huge difference when headlines come out saying "Hamas beheads 40 babies," vs when they say "there was a baby among the murdered civilians." Ask yourself why someone would say the first if it isn't true and you'll get your answer.

7 hours ago, Zorral said:

Let us never forget the beheaded babies that were proven not to be. 

The lesson is to not believe what pops up in feeds.

Particularly if the feed feeds into what the recipient really would like to believe.

Israel does this constantly. They make a truly shocking claim that will have you on their side without question, click bait if you will. And then later, very very very quietly, they will retract the statement such that it barely makes a dent against the original statement.

They also do it with accountability, like when the IDF killed Shireen Abu Akleh, the admission of guilt was so quiet that if you weren't following the story you would have missed it completely.

On 1/26/2024 at 5:56 PM, Ran said:

Evidence is that there's many more employees who are militants or affiliated with them, but didn't necessarily take part in the attack.

This particular post has been bothering because it was just too familiar. Here's a report about another aid organisation suddenly being labelled a terrorist organisation, very notably, after an inquiry into the r*p* of a Palestinian boy by Israeli prison authorities.

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/tamara-nassar/israel-criminalized-group-following-report-raped-palestinian-child

The one thing the Israeli prison/war machine can do "very well" is find terrorists among aid organisations. Somehow, it's always when they're called upon to do better and treat Palestinians better. So of course as soon as the ICJ said Israeli must stop blocking humanitarian aid into Gaza, they blocked aid completely. To use an analogy, Israel has been behaving like an abuser throughout its entire occupation. Everything it's required to do better because its crimes are brought to light, it retaliates by punishing Palestinians.

14 hours ago, SaffronLady said:

And it is times like these I feel so out of place on an English-speaking forum, my family and me being from a country that was once colonized and all that, watching the tragedies of another.

I completely understand how you feel. The western intelligentsia is truly something to behold. That people can debate humanity is something that will forever shock me.

we can try to "intellectualise" this all we want, but whatever side you stand on, you can't deny this was a loss for israel. they stand accused of genocide. the ruling today literally means they are on trial for genocide. surely that means something; hopefully it means israel is PR-conscious enough to at least attempt redemption. but i honestly have no faith in them.

^thank you.

28 minutes ago, Altherion said:

The Indian government has inaugurated a Hindu temple built on the land formerly occupied by a Muslim mosque which, various Hindu groups claimed and the Supreme Court of India affirmed, was itself built on the ruins of an earlier temple. From the BBC article:

 

please excuse my ignorance, i'm genuinely curious, but shouldn't a religious leader (or some council of them) inaugurate something like that? i guess i don't trust politicians in general, especially in election years, and this is kind of "uncomfortable" given that a mosque was razed and there seems to be a growing nationalist movement. but i'm not Indian and my discomfort is really just something i feel, not a general condemnation of the temple itself ... not necessarily i guess ...

3 hours ago, Lin Meili said:

Update: I have now signed up with a publisher. This is for ebook, print, and audiobook.

Just got my advance and spent it to pay for my recently deceased father's medical debt.

congrats on the deal.

i'm very sorry about your father. 

On 1/21/2023 at 6:59 PM, Kalnestk Oblast said:

The reason that avatar has such long legs is because it's the Dennys of movies. It isn't most people's first pick or favorite, but when you want to go to the movies (especially in a dead period like the winter) this is the pick that will be guaranteed to be...fine, and worth it in a theater. It makes no impressions and carries no weight. It is the popcorn of popcorn movies.

I'm finding the conversation very interesting because I've always wondered how it gets decided that movies are impactful/audiences actually connect with them, because I must be one of few people who were genuinely waiting for this film. My whole family, in fact. We've already had repeat watches because we genuinely enjoy the franchise, can connect with the strong environmental themes, and are eagerly awaiting the so-called Ash people rumoured for Avatar 3.

This isn't directed at you, but I personally find most of the criticism against the franchise rather lazy, like one guy made a bunch of bullet points against it and now everyone just sort of picks from that list to argue why the movies are "bad." Stuff like "can you even name the main character at the top of your head?" The answer doesn't matter IMHO. My favourite book of all time is "The Remains of the Day" and I kid you not when I say I couldn't name the main character two weeks after putting it down. Bit it still remains the most profound story I've ever read.

I guess what I'm trying to say, in a roundabout way, is that people might simply enjoy the franchise. At least enough to explain the ridiculous box office numbers. The story is "simple," sure enough, but some things, IMHO, are allowed to be. I'm South African, my history dictates that I NOT have to imagine overly complex motivations for human cruelty. Humans are shit, for the most part. Especially when you factor in capitalism. A lot of mines and petroleum companies STILL have to be bullied into prioritising human life and the environment over money. Just a year ago (IIRC) the Wild Coast was in danger from Shell. There's nothing complex about that. If someone wrote that story, it really would be that straightforward. So I guess the "it's too simple" argument kind of baffles me.

On 1/6/2022 at 12:48 AM, mormont said:

If Kit and family only show up to fulfil the purpose they have in the story, they don't fulfil the purpose they have in the story, because we don't know them and have no reason to care. They become obvious story levers instead of characters.

Those earlier chapters with them set the scene. There's a bunch of stuff in there about how Bakari has personality (at least in the eyes of his father) despite being very young, and about the family dynamics that let us care about their fate.

I don't feel the first part of the book drags so I don't see a problem to solve, but if I did, this wouldn't be the solution.

ps recalling those early scenes, I have to say poor Giselle. I guess she wouldn't exactly have been dropping by Nieuwestadt weekly but as things turned out, she never got to see Kit or Bakari again. But somehow Alex wound up getting to spend the rest of his life with them. And it was all because of Alex's best friend in the world. I feel like Giselle gets a seat at the high table at the We Hate James Holden Club meetings, which I believe are very well attended.

... and this is why I'm staring a #ReleaseTheNamiAndWeiCut campaign. 

i also wanted more prax, but more just because i really liked the character, i didn't care if he would add anything to the series. i just wanted a "keeping up" sort of thing. "where are they now?" same with avasarala's family. at least one throwaway line about how her descendants are doing.

i think if kit's chapters went to mei and nami, i might have actually cared more for them, as opposed to slogging through just because i understand that something huge will result from them. maybe establish that kit is living on that other world through convos on the ship and that would be enough to justify alex leaving sol; also establish alex hasn't kept in touch with kit, build up the guilt throughout the book until at the end he has no choice but to follow his son, even though we never meet kit so to speak. imho we really didn't need kit's chapters. mei and nami forever woohoo!