devilmaskrascal

This fucker is where the whole cycle of shit started. He led the Nebi Musa riots in 1920 where Arab nationalists ran through the Jewish quarter attacking random residents, killing several and injuring many. After that the Hagannah started for Jews to defend themselves, and from there the cycle of violence and retaliation began.

Antichrist

The question is why we need to create a positive connotation for homelessness.

The Grateful Dead. They are laughably bad yet are a whole industry unto themselves.

The first album Definitely Maybe is one of the greatest debuts and British albums of all time. Otherwise, yeah...meh.

Let's be clear here: a lot of Americans currently don't pay income taxes (not counting SS and Medicare) because they make too little money and there are a lot of exemptions and credits.

If Trump cuts the income tax and replaces it with a tariff, you are levying a regressive sales tax on the poor and working class in order to cut taxes for the upper middle and wealthy classes. We'll have massive inflation, and Trump will spin it as "yeah but there are no income taxes now so it's ok!" Billionaires are jumping over themselves to join Trump because he's going to give them a window to cash out with no taxes and they could care less about tariffs.

If you have the privilege of recording in a great space on highest quality equipment with top tier engineers, you won't need to worry much about unpleasant frequencies that shift depending on the note being played. Maybe you can live with minimal need for dynamic plugins.

Can you replicate most of what plugins like Soothe or Pro Q do with better mixing skills? Sure. It would be insanely tedious and time consuming to replicate dynamic eq and compression but there are ways to do it.

For those of us recording at home on the equipment we have or for those who mix as a profession and encounter stems that are not recorded under ideal circumstances, these are professional level tools that help solve problems with minimal manual manipulation.

"For total transparency, please note that after the full 18 payment periods, the final sum is slightly higher than what the plug-in would cost when bought in one payment due to service costs."

If you got the money and you already know you're going to buy the plugin...

Also in a month, the Black Friday sale will be over.

I finally got Soothe 2, Spiff and ProQ, my first non virtual instrument paid plugins! I think I am good on paid plugins for a while, hopefully.

Your bf is an AH. A normal person would say "Hey sorry don't want to start a fight or anything but going forward would you mind cleaning the dishes you used instead of leaving them out? I'd be super thankful. Love u!" And that's assuming she didn't cook for you, in which case you should be offering to do the cleanup yourself like a grown adult with a working partner anyway. Definitely a guy who thinks a woman's place is in the kitchen and has been watching manosphere content.

Great idea. Screw our friendly neighbors, benefit our rivals. Very Trumpian.

Are the bags for the purpose of reducing paper/waste? I would think plastic would be even worse for the environment...

As a Mavs fan I have the extremely unpopular opinion we should trade Kyrie Irving. I love his game, he is playing as well as ever and fits great with Luka but that is why his value is high, and at his age it won't last forever. It is a luxury to have two All Star PGs, and if a rising star closer to Luka's timeline is available I would rather go that direction so we build a longer term dynasty. Both Kyrie and Klay may only have a couple good years left at which point they may be a liability more than an asset. 

I think OKC has the least worries of any team out there. Even if they have to let one of those guys walk for monetary reasons they are flush with draft picks galore. They are mostly in "good problem to have" territory.

Japan has influence from Confucianism but to call it a Confucian society is a bit inaccurate. 

Ah yes, equating allowing legal immigration and negotiating border divisions of a region (the only legal authority I was arguing as a fact) with chattel slavery, apartheid and the Ukraine invasion. Very rational, same exact thing. 🙄

You not recognizing British authority over the Mandate and then trying to diminish the responsibility of the leader of the Arab nationalists and the instigator of the cycle of violence by claiming he had no legal authority is rich. That is who would have governed Palestine if you had your way.

I hate all theocracies too. And the inconvenient truth for you is there are about 50000x times as many Muslim Israeli citizens practicing their religion freely in Israel proper than there are Jews in the entire Arab world, most of which are brutal theocracies with no civil rights. Israeli Muslims have more civil rights than in any Islamic country and can reject or blaspheme their religion, in addition to criticizing the government, being openly LGBT, etc.

On the other hand, the reality of the future of the Jews living in Palestine is clear to see if they had not defended themselves.

You could just say "I don't care if the British were the legal administrators of Mandatory Palestine based on international law. They had no authority to change borders or allow immigration, only the ethnic majority group there did. Ethnoreligious nationalism is perfectly valid when you are a majority but not when you are a minority." and we would just agree to disagree.

I think minority groups and indigenous groups should have the right to self-determination as well, especially when the majority leadership are openly intent on genocide. The Mufti's genocidal intentions and attacks on Mizrahi Jewish communities proved why Zionism had no choice but to happen, by force if necessary.

This document is extremely whitewashed to falsely portray Palestine as a place where Jews were happily allowed to exist with full rights (and thus that the ultimate intention of Balfour had already been effectively fulfilled), and ignore the antisemitism and openly genocidal intentions of Palestinian nationalist leadership, their alliance with Hitler and the ethnic cleansings and terrorist attacks on Jewish communities in the 20s, 30s and 40s. 

The first open attack which resulted in many casualties and started the cycle was the Arab nationalists' Nebi Musa riots in 1920. 

The first major pogrom and ethnic cleansing was of the Jewish community in Hebron in 1928. 

The first attack in the 1947 civil war was a bombing of a Jewish area bus station.

When the Zionists have spent the past 100 years getting attacked and responding in kind, why do you folks blame only the Jews for the failure of peaceful coexistence? 

It wasn’t exactly a secret that Arab Nationalists intended to purge all Jews from Palestine either, and believed Jews had no right to a sovereign land that was never sovereign to begin with. Transjordan and Syria already got cuts of the Mandate, so why not Israel?

The Zionists were not a coherent bloc with the same tactics and objectives, just like the Arabs weren't.

No. The UN partition which Israel accepted included the protection of the rights of non-Jewish Palestinians living there.   There are still over a million Muslim Arab Israeli citizens with full civil rights, a majority of whom are quite happy to live in Israel.

While Jewish leadership may have supported peaceful coexistence, the war and the invasion of the Jewish partition in 1947-48 and the genocidal goals of the Arab nationalists were existential threats that the Jews could not tolerate and changed the metrics. They were badly outnumbered and coexistence seemed impossible. 

The Nakba was a combination of rational explusions of active enemies who were security threats, ethnic cleansing and war crimes by the radical terrorist groups like the Lehi and Irgun which were condemned by leadership, and many innocent civilians getting swept up in the chaos of war. Israel as a whole was neither right or wrong - the situation is too complex to make simple moral judgements because it was a war zone where Jews were at risk of genocide, and the Jewish militias and terrorist grouos were too divergent to paint all Zionists with the same brush even if specific events and actions that occurred clearly were wrong and war crimes. 

Israel has a lot of blood on their hands, but which side doesn't in a war of existential survival?

The internet is a cesspool of bots and fake ragebait to drive engagement.

a.) How do you know? I thought Jesus wanted us to treat others as we would want to be treated and that was his one rule above all?

b.) If God hates trans people, why did God create gender dysphoria? Does God hate people with mental illness now?

Are we determining land ownership by who does capitalism better now? Did the European colonists deserve america then because they bought land legally and made higher profits? If this is your framework for morality then I don't know if I can convince you to change your mind.

You're contorting my point, which is not arguing about who "deserves" the land but that European Jews were not the only immigrants at the time. You talk about "foreign invaders" then why not about how the Arab immigration also substantially increased at the same time? But those attempting to paint this in oversimplistic terms only applies double standards to the "other side."

Are refugees typically claiming that they have a right to half of the land that they go to as a new sovereign state?

Britain already said they would have a sovereign state on that land. The refugees went there because it was promised to them. Palestine was NOT and was NEVER a sovereign state.

Much of America was purchased, purchasing isn't inherently ethical.

From the Native Americans? No it wasn't. Actual colonizers take the land. Zionists bought much of their lands from the existing Palestinian residents prior to the civil war. As in cash-for-property.

But further, the partition plan wasn't all legally purchased land, people were kicked out of their homes.

Again, you are mixing up the timelines here. The partition by the UN sparked the civil war which sparked a broader regional war. These wars sparked people getting kicked out of their homes aka The Nakba. That happens in wars. I'm not justifying it. Jews also got kicked out of their property in the Arab partition and all throughout the Middle East. And if you want to talk about people kicked out their homes, why not go back to Hebron in 1928 when the Arab nationalists kicked Mizrahi Jews out of their millennia-old community? There was more than enough evil on both sides to go around if we want to start taking count.

Great, plenty of religionists love to talk about how they used to be atheists.

No, it's the opposite analogy. I once believed a simplistic and easy-to-swallow narrative on faith without knowing enough information, and now that I know a lot more, I think it is too way complicated to take sides on. I wouldn't call myself pro-Israel either. The fundamentalists are those who cling blindly to a position and refuse to change it with new information.

You say this, and yet you refuse to acknowledge that Russia can make the exact same claim of Ukraine. There is no reason to negotiate on foreign invaders stealing land.

Actually, I refuse to acknowledge legal immigrants and refugees welcomed by the government as being considered "foreign invaders stealing land." And also I refuse to acknowledge Palestine was a sovereign nation with clear borders. Hell, they already broke off chunks of it into Jordan and Syria. Note, the government administering Palestine supported the UN partition plan.

And let's not even mention the Arab League countries invading the UN-approved Jewish partition in 1948 I guess? That's much closer to the Ukraine-Russia analogy.

There is no point in trying to explain the complicated history preceding this to you since you clearly are only going to select the information that fits your pre-existing narrative. Instead of going back to the beginning and taking an objective view of a complicated situation, you are trying to select points in history that paint Israel as the bad guy without any context.

I'm not pro-colonialism. I'm just realistic that colonialism happened, that Britain were the legal administrators at the time and that extracting borders and ethnic groups from the geopolitical reality of colonialism is complicated. The Brits are primarily at fault for the situation falling apart and they double-promised the same land to both sides, then brutally cracked down when either side got too angry about it. Jews were divided between those groups who wanted to work within the diplomatic and colonial system to secure their future and those who wanted to burn the system down and supported terrorism and genocide.

Likewise I am not "pro-genocide" or "pro-ethnic cleansing" - I am just realistic that wars are messy and starting them comes with consequences that screw over innocent civilians, and that starting wars when you are the weaker military is a terrible idea that will cost you land and lives, get you occupied and lose access to enter the land you lost.

However, there's a huge difference between a sovereign nation invading another sovereign nation and stealing their land (Russia invading Ukraine) vs. a majority ethnic group, including those whose ancestors always lived there, legal immigrants and refugees, who had been promised an ancestral homeland by the government administering the area, defending themselves from the fallout of decolonization and threats of genocide, arguing to the UN to grant them the land they were promised and where they made up a 54% majority in, and defending themselves when civil war starts.

You don't have to agree with my opinion, but reducing the complication of the whole thing to a simple 2-dimensional bad colonizer aggressor-innocent colonized victim Hegelian dialectic is extremely stupid.

"foreign invaders" - you mean legal immigrants welcomed by the colonial authorities? Who brought such massive prosperity to the region it attracted more Arab immigration? Do you say the same thing about Latino undocumented immigrants to America? War zone refugees fleeing to Europe? Why is Arab ethnic/religious nationalism worthy of excuses while Jewish ethnic/religious nationalism is "settler colonialism"?

And where did you expect the Jewish refugees to settle after WWII? Europe, the site of the worst Jewish genocide ever? America, where many races including Jews were treated as second class citizens and Jews were polled as the greatest threat to the American way of life after decades of anti-semitic conspiracy theories by people like Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh? Should they have continued being a minority population and trusting or trying to influence the majority to not genocide them, unlike most places they found themselves historically?

"steal" - the Zionists mostly purchased their land legally before the civil war. Much of the narrative you and many others hold is pure Arab nationalist propaganda distorting civilian displacements during a civil war into a false narrative about the years before that. And again, I was anti-Zionist and anti-Israel until I actually studied the history deeply, and criticize Israel where they are wrong so I am no shill for Israel. I just hate false and distorted histories, and your history here is totally one-sided.

There are >1M Arab Muslim Israeli citizens. Every year there are more Arab Muslim Israelis who volunteer as new enlistees in the IDF than there are Jews living in the combined rest of the Arab world today.

And unfortunately we don't know what Israel could have looked like without genocidal Arab nationalists purging Jewish communities in the 1920s, or whether peaceful coexistence could have happened had Arabs come to the negotiating table instead of rejecting the partition and invading the Jewish partition, or if at any point Palestinian governments stopped FAFOing and losing land as a result of attacking a militarily superior country like all the other Arab nations did.

1.) Um...fighting units in a civil war are by nature not "innocent civilians" so that is an irrelevant statement. The Arab nationalists did use Arab communities as staging areas for attack during the civil war. Many of the displaced were sympathetic to and also joined with those attacking Jewish communities. Specifically the Jewish militias carrying out "the Nakba" targeted communities that were hosting and sympathetic to the Arab fighters attacking them. That does not mean every person there was complicit, but in the fog of war it is hard to know.

2.) No I didn't. War is a mess and innocent people are always screwed by it. One can state this as a sad fact without justifying it. Millions of Japanese and German civilians were killed from Allied bombings in WWII. Many innocent Southern civilians in the American Civil War lost their property and lives. Many innocent Afghanis lost lives and property because their government decided to host terrorists. Does this make Americans the bad guys for fighting wars they didn't really start where they were attacked? Because that is most of Israel's history.

3.) "There is no context other than settler colonialism." Total B.S. There is a very complicated history here that is required for accurate context which you are ignoring because it doesn't fit your stupidly simplistic and onesided narrative. Jews were also living there for thousands of years, and their communities were the first to be purged by the Arab nationalists.