I LOVE BIG BROTHER ^/s

Gold. How fukken basic. Basic bitch.

I have one house mate in his 70s and one in her 80s, and she has lung cancer. Luckily our social systems are taking care of them, barely; but that’s going away and the cost of living is rising way faster than projected.

Like cow tipping

No, the user is Jokes. This is /news @lemmy.world

The language of an abusive ex who knows it’s a lie even as they say it.

This is almost double the funding of NASA (1 year)

He probably meant some mundane explanation, but it’d be nice to have clarity as to exactly why. I guess it was a lightning round though.

Good interview. Give it a listen or read. Aliens don’t pop up 'til the end.

Kinda wild the interviewer just let “they’re real” slide by with no follow up.

tldr: A CDC-funded, Danish research group. To study if withholding the Hepatitis B vaccine for 6 weeks after birth is detrimental (as opposed to at birth, as is standard). This research group already has a history of controversy about poor and misleading research practices leading to unusable science (also in Guinea-Bissau, also on thousands of children). They were awarded $1.6 mil in a non-compete proposal under CDC’s RFK Jr; who you might remember is an antivaxxer.

The article contains many links and more details.

The world’s future is in a really frightening place right now. It looks like, with the US advocating for a world controlled by US, China, and Russia, that “they”* are literally trying to make 1984 happen with forever wars between colluding enemies and everything else that dystopia brings.

I agree, Epstein was a … not a pawn. Maybe a bishop.

*In this case we know some of who “they” are. Like the Heritage Foundation.

There is if you are rich enough.

If we’re going to live in a privacy-less world, it needs to be for everyone

Tried updating it. it’s https://archive.is/eU1K9 And Here’s the NYT article

*edit * had to update this too

The posted article is excellent and everyone should read it [techdirt always writes great stuff]. The story’s primary source is [this NYT article via archive.is. Every secondary source fail to mention “collateral aliens”, and I’m here to rectify that.

ICE is already arresting people just because an officer is suspicious. the NYT article is 2 things:

1. the director changing the justification of why it’s ok. That being: “the person might not be here later, so we have to arrest them now” … In reality they call this “likely to escape” (same difference).

2. The new thing is using this justification to arrest anyone who is nearby, who they call “collateral aliens”, in group round-ups.

In summary: A single ICE officer can think a dude on the corner looks wrong; can arrest him because he might not be there later; then arrest you just because you’re nearby. Now you’re a “collateral alien”, and have no due process and cannot plead your case.

hey, I saw that phrasing in a reddit comment. … its a good phrase though

Link is a summary of this NYT article (archive.is link). The TLDR is: officers are given the authority to arrest anyone they personally suspect is an illegal immigrant who they think might not be “at the scene” later (e.g. a street corner).

Link fails to mention this:

The memo tells agents who make warrantless arrests to fill out a form afterward that documents the factors they considered in determining that someone was “likely to escape.” That includes situations in which agents set out to arrest a particular person and then take others in the vicinity into custody. Mr. Lyons called that group “collateral aliens.”

This should terrify every American. Group round-ups based on one officer’s vibes that day.

Stop calling the protests “anti-ICE”. That’s not what they’re about! They’re closer to “No Kings”

Well, they intend to deport at least 100 million (out of 345 mil total). Pulling from the other comment, that’s 145 million left in the concentration camps (barring any deaths).

How many slaves prisoners do you think they want? …How many can they control?

My mama got the Full No-Killing package. Thank goodness; she’s only half dead.

Basically, if his gun isn’t holstered they can claim all kinds of things like he reached for his gun, or an accidental discharge, or all kinds of excuses for shooting a guy. It helps them frame the situation as dangerous and chaotic.

The broader goal? imo: For the officers: To hurt a guy. The way they treat people makes me think they like hurting people. For the feds: to ‘raise the temperature’ and agitate, presumably to incite retribution.

Im aware the 2nd paragraph reads like classic tinfoil hat stuff. But I’m not alone in thinking it’s true.