so a few months ago i saw avatar (2009) from beginning to end for the first time.. if i'd seen this when i was ten, i'd probably have loved it.
i find the film entertaining but i do have issues with it.. the movie is beautiful to look at, and there's definitely some interesting concepts.. but star wars it ain't.. first issue, the na'vi: these are blue-skinned humanoids with tails.. my first question is: why do blue monkeys who live 5 light years away on an extrasolar moon have african accents?!.
i know what writer/director james cameron is doing in this film.
What is amazing about Avatar is that it's the highest grossing movie of all time and yet it's had almost zero influence on society - it never get's referenced, people don't dress up and go to conventions. Nothing.
It just seems weird when you compare it to other big grossing movies such as Marvel movies, Star Wars and so on.
Whatever happened to the other 5 movies they were planning to make?
does a child have the right to decide that he or she is not comfortable with their gender and so would want to change from being a boy to a girl and vice versa?
?.
What about children that want to be pony's, mermaids or whatever? Maybe they should wait to see if they still feel the same when they are 20+
But definitely the people encouraging them to damage their bodies should be sued and prosecuted for the harm they do.
It's all mostly a form of grooming.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
For all those who imagine they saw video of a police officer kneeling on a mans neck. You may want to check what you think you saw, but without the media voiceover telling you that it's a white cop deliberately kneeling on a black mans neck to kill him. Try it with a voiceover telling you that the camera angle only makes it appear that he's kneeling on his neck when he isn't, and that there is a more accurate body-cam recording and other videos showing something different..
Like all the videos everyone thinks they saw of Trump calling neo-nazis "fine people" or suggesting people should be injected with bleach to cure corona-virus ...
You may imagine you saw it, but you really didn't.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
I think this cop mishandled the situation, there should have been a moment when it was realized Floyd was not struggling, rolled him over and made an observation toward the next step.
I wonder how many times people claim they can't breath or feign passing out, only to then struggle when restraints are relaxed and try to abscond, grab someone's gun or whatever?
I think the cop was distracted by intervening vocal pedestrians and he wanted to show and prove that he was in control over the situation for himself but he went too far.
The interference of the crowd certainly didn't help. Maybe they should go on trial too?
Could this have happen if Floyd was a white guy ?
Cops kill more white people than black people. So yes, easily, and it wouldn't even make the news.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
George Floyd had was found to have no physical signs of asphyxiation. Even the close-up video, awful as it is to watch, confirms that he WAS breathing, and other videos show that he was already shouting "I can't breathe" BEFORE he was even taken to the ground. He was also found to have a high enough dose of fentanyl in his system to kill not just one, but a handful of people. It's almost certain that he was going to die even if he had not gotten into a confrontation with police, and it was 100% his fault that he got into the confrontation to begin with.
Sounds like an acquittal to me then. Because he could breathe and there was another obvious cause of death and no evidence of the cause that is claimed.
A better argument can be made that Chauvin's abusive and unauthorized restraint tactic exacerbated Floyd's demise and that it should have been obvious that he was in a state of medical emergency and needed to be handled with care
If only someone had called paramedics. Oh, wait, they did. Worst murderers ever.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
He put a knee on his neck for eight minutes till he died of asphyxiation.
Did he? Can you prove it? There's lots of evidence that he didn't. That's the point of a trial - to evaluate the evidence. You're maybe just repeating the story you have already been told ...
You would have to have the moral compass of the must evil and uber circuit overseer to not think what happened was not wrong.
Of course it's wrong. People shouldn't be dealing and taking drugs, passing fake currency and committing crime. They shouldn't put people in the situation where they are liable to suddenly die of an overdose.
Oh, you meant the cop? Well I guess people shouldn't ... follow the procedures they have been told to follow? Is that what you mean? If it is, shouldn't it be the people who set the procedures on trial?
I just feel sorry for all the good police officers out there.
Me too. I also feel sorry for the victims of all the criminals. I don't feel much sympathy for the criminals themselves or cry if they die.
Here's a question: should policing be 100% safe? Should accidental deaths never happen? How effective do you imagine that form of policing would be and how many deaths would result from the "no death policing". I would suggest many more than happen now.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
Anyone following the Derek Chauvin trial?
If you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.
If the trial was fair, I think he should be acquitted. There is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.
But is it fair? The threat of riots and destruction if people don't get the verdict they "demand" and the number of candidate jurors who said they feared for their life suggests a perfectly fair verdict isn't possible.
The media create these situations for a reason. They know riots = views and page clicks = $$$.
i saw a statistic the other day that something like 25% of all the debt that the us has incurred since 1776 was created in the last 12 months.
that's because they have printed so much currency and instead of letting that stop them, they are going to continue printing more to go on a spending spree on crazy green-new-deal schemes and union handouts.. does anyone think that this can be anything other than inflationary?
they are effectively stealing the wealth of everyone to then hand money out to people.
Investors can demand it, but that doesn't mean they're going to get it.
Investors can chose to invest elsewhere. The return on bonds needs to be worthwhile in order to sell them.
I agree with you that we are in an inflationary environment, however interest rates are lower than they've ever been in modern history.
Right, we're seeing short-term manipulation for political purposes. The point is that it cannot continue indefinitely.
Incidentally, destroying a currency is one of the tactics of socialism to allow them to take over the system.
If the Fed raises the interbank lending rate, other interest rates rise, like you said, so the banks can make money.
They don't set the interbank rate, the banks do.
This slows demand for borrowing and takes the pressure off of the housing market, reducing the inflation of housing prices.
It does slow borrowing, but house-prices are subject to other factors such as demand, employment and the cost of building materials and labor.
Since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913, the American dollar has lost at least 98% of its value. Coincidence?
Exactly - this is the pattern of all fiat currencies (many don't last that long) and the challenge of storing wealth over extended periods (decades). People traditionally used gold for this.
Fun fact: the US once outlawed gold and forced people to sell it to them at below market rates, then raised the prices once they had it. The government is not there to protect your wealth - they are there to protect their power over your wealth.
nwt luke chapt 1.
41 well, as elizabeth heard the greeting of mary, the infant in her womb leaped, and elizabeth was filled with holy spirit 42 and loudly cried out: “blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruitage of your womb!
43 so how is it that this privilege is mine, to have the mother of my lord come to me?
I think trying to connect abortions to honouring Mary is a real stretch and the bible is really a poor standard for morality.
I think abortion is objectively bad and should be generally dissuaded as it's killing the most vulnerable of all human life, often for no better reason than laziness or poor judgement by those involved.
There are cases when it may be appropriate, but it's over used as a procedure.
But we don't need the bible or Mary to come to that conclusion. We have a higher standard than god's book of abuses, which is our evolved humanity.
so it looks like about half of my jw relatives are not going back to the meetings once they open up the kingdom halls.
the main reason all of them give is that if we were truly living in the last days, jehovah would not have allowed the door to door preaching work, and kingdom hall meetings to stop for over a year.. the elders have talked to some of them and tried to convince them that letter writing is accomplishing the same thing as door to door, and zoom is the same as meetings-----------but my relatives just won’t buy it anymore.
just a note here, at first, the kingdom hall lock-downs, and the no preaching door to door was not that bad,the relatives still held on to their faith strongly because they believed it was temporary.
Childish fairy stories where a hero arrives and magically fixes everything are really compelling - who wouldn't want that!
And it's not just children that love these stories. Every Marvel super-hero movie is effectively the same thing.
Of course it's not real and not going to happen. The Avengers aren't going to show up to save us any more than Prince Charming, or Jehovah.
They are all just story characters to make children sleep at night.
