https://www.history.com/news/the-hindenburg-disaster-9-surprising-facts ...

Goebbels wanted to name the Hindenburg for Adolf Hitler.
Eckener, no fan of the Third Reich, named the airship for the late German president Paul von Hindenburg and refused Goebbels’ request to name it after Hitler. The Führer, never enthralled by the great airships in the first place, was ultimately glad that the zeppelin that crashed in a fireball didn’t bear his name.

also...

Frau Eva von Zeppelin was offended by the group's name (Led Zepplin) for "dishonouring the family name". The direct descendant of Count Ferdinand von Zeppelin demanded the band to change their name. On 28th Feb, 1970, the group performed one show in Copenhagen as The Nobs but decided to retain their original name afterwards due to popular and critical opinions that favoured their original name.

https://www.thesound.co.nz/home/music/2018/09/Led-Zeppelin-Facts-2.html#:~:text=Frau%20Eva%20von%20Zeppelin%20was,band%20to%20change%20their%20name.

Less well known [than other paradoxes] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

- Karl Popper from The Open Society and Its Enemies [1945]

I’ve actually changed my opinion…I now agree with Republicans that we should ignore the leak…for now. It will be easier to maintain the outrage until November if we put off being outraged until July.

I almost hope the Democrats fail in their efforts to write new federal law limiting limits on abortion access, and don’t change filibuster rules to once again require only 50 votes to pass a bill as that might drive Republicans to the polls just like this decision will drive democrats and independents and many Republicans to the polls to vote against Republicans across the board.
Between the sedition caucus being denied a place on the ballot and this outrage, the outlook for the midterms has never looked better.

Your ‘nothing to see here’ opinions, red herring arguments, and dismissive comments have also been noted.

Enjoy your moving on.

Not sure what you’re afraid of. Maybe being called out for your own changes of opinions you won’t admit to? (Like happened here-https://videosift.com/video/A-Better-Way-to-Tax-the-Rich)

Your opinion noted. Enjoy your discussion!

I am moving on. I believe I can rely on you to "un-hide" any relevant discourse; and to note in detail any/all changes to the opinion. Or whatever else you may fear.

The leak is significant but the point of this video is the lack of discussion from your political party around the leak's CONTENT, not the leak itself.

You might see little point but I do not, hence the discussion. You can exit if you see no point here (but you do not exit LOL). If you would like to keep this on the DL till its approved then you are trying to hide discourse and a potential change of the opinion... why?

Your opinion about perjury duly noted. I assume that you are a lawyer, and know exactly what you are talking about. Since all of their testimony is public record, shall I expect to see the appropriate prosecutor convening a grand jury to address this crime?

Your other opinion as to "how it works" is also duly noted. I guess SCOTUS should not have overruled Plessy vs Ferguson (decided in 1896) when they heard Brown vs Board of Education (1954).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal

Precedent is just that until evidence proves otherwise.

Pluto was a planet until it wasn't. Truth evolves over time.

1857 Slavery was fundamentally ruled legal under Dred Scott. Truly a wrong decision and a study in judicial overreach.

In 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment overturned the Dred Scott decision by granting citizenship to all those born in the United States, regardless of color.


Finally this is just a leaked draft opinion. One must wait to see if overturned and on what grounds .


That being said The left waited decades to get abortions. The right has waited 50+ years to get a legal argument that might overturn that decision.

50 years later and finally have a conservative court and a case that might alter Roe V wade.

The leak itself is newsworthy, but not 10% as newsworthy as what they leaked, which is proof that every single Republican Supreme Court judge lied outright under oath in their confirmation hearings when they all said “roe v wade is settled law and established precedent and will not be overturned by me”. The first chance they got, they took off that paper thin mask and revealed their agenda to legislate from the bench based on personal opinion not science, fact, or established law. They should ALL be impeached tomorrow for perjury during their sworn hearings.

Time to add 5 more liberal judges to the bench by June 1 and rehear the cases. It’s legal, and the only way to negate the liars, rapists, and religious zealots that Trump improperly installed by stealing two seats with McConnells help and filling a third with a drunk rapist. Turnabout is fair play.

MAY!? This IS the decision, they may rewrite the explanation slightly, but without a few assassinations, “accidents”, or criminal charges, this is how the vote will be reported next month, they already voted in Feb as I understand it, it’s just not official until it’s published but rarely are votes changed, and soon abortion will likely be 100% illegal in any state led by Republicans. Anybody know Barrett’s address? What about Kevanaugh? They, and any state representative voting against personal autonomy, should be doxed at every abortion clinic entrance so the now choice less women, many rape or incest victims, can make themselves martyrs and not just suicide statistics. There will be no exceptions now that they can write the laws that way.

We know this is a real draft because they instantly started looking for the “leaker”. You can’t “leak” a fake decision.

I hope women will start a sex strike in every red state. No nookie until they can control their own womb and it’s contents. It’s the ONLY logical move unless they want to be incubators with no autonomy.

Pretty certain that, if you disagreed with their decision, “wait and see” would not only be a terrible idea to you, it would also be an insult to your intelligence.

I’m petitioning Newsom to boycott any state enacting new laws restricting abortion, “new” meaning in the last decade. California does a shitload of business, we shouldn’t be doing it with states that are removing rights from women.

I just can’t fathom, with overpopulation being the root of all major problems humanity and the planet face, why so many idiots still think they should “be fruitful and multiply”, and should force that on their neighbors too. It’s the height of stupidity, and their children will pay the price for the lack of thought their parents put into the decision. We need to abort 9/10 embryos (or get 10 times better at stopping fertilization in the first place), not increase birth rates by double.

(Before you try the “but it’s murder” nonsense, legally and scientifically those things inside wombs aren’t people, and even if they WERE, one person cannot enslave another even in life or death situations. If they could, we would force live organ donations, transfusions, etc with the donor having no right to refuse.)

Yes, they are talking about the leak. If you don't see how such a rare event (an entire draft SCOTUS opinion leaked to the press prior to actual release has NEVER happened before) is newsworthy, I don't know what to say.

I do imagine that it MAY also end up being a "potential massive victory", but it isn't right now. I see little point in speculating about what may happen, when there will be plenty of time to discuss the actual decision, once it has actually been released and becomes part of Federal jurisprudence.

They are real women, no matter how you wish otherwise.
Are men that take testosterone supplements not real males? Same for women taking estrogen, not real females? Women who’ve had a hysterectomy? Men who had penectomies or testicular removal?
Is this a “real woman” who should compete against women? https://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/31662608/boxer-patricio-manuel-transgender-pioneer-looking-next-fight

What expertise in the fields of gender vs sex vs sexual orientation do you boast to contradict the actual experts with careers in those subjects?
A:None, you’re an alleged maintenance/service tech with embarrassing language skills, and apparently a total lack of scientific knowledge.

Where’s your evidence of that “disadvantage “? Where are the rest of the 2% of athletes that are top of their sport and trans? You make the claim, prove it (one example does not prove anything). Guess you failed math too.

That could be true if your loopy idea that men are pretending to be women to get an advantage in sports were in any way true, but it’s pure unadulterated nonsense.
Trans women must go through years of hormone therapy; supplements, hormone blockers, sometimes even surgery to be able to compete. In many leagues they must never go through male puberty. They cannot, as you clearly think is the norm, just put on a woman’s swimsuit and compete with women, then whip their dicks out after competition and go back to being macho men. Your insistence on keeping your head firmly encased in your lower intestine, in the dark, listening to yourself echo through your own fart chamber is what lets you believe such utterly ridiculous nonsense.

I think it’s abundantly clear to everyone which of us lives in an echo chamber of lies and nonsense and which of us thinks for themselves, and equally clear which prefers the light of knowledge and fact and which sticks to their dark cave of ignorance and misinformed opinion.

Er mer gerd…. ROTFLMFAHS!!! Mr cranial rectosis projects so freaking hard, yo.

Way to conflate homosexuality with pedophilia despite all studies showing the opposite is true.

https://lgbpsychology.org/html/facts_molestation.html
https://psmag.com/social-justice/do-gay-men-have-more-sexual-interest-in-children-than-straight-men-do-62127

Because I know you won't read either study, let me quote....
"Using phallometric test sensitivities to calculate the proportion of true pedophiles among various groups of sex offenders against children, and taking into consideration previously reported mean numbers of victims per offender group, the ratio of heterosexual to homosexual pedophiles was calculated to be approximately 11:1." If homosexuals were even equal in child molesting, that would be closer to 9:1.
I guess you now agree that heterosexual teachers shouldn't be in the classroom because they are more likely to be child molesters, because scientific fact overrides prejudicial opinion.

So, Bobby, what is the 2020 Republican platform?
“Block Democrats from any progress”, absolutely nothing else.
There wa a proposal for a Republican Party platform….”1) raise taxes by $4500 on all low income people who today don’t pay taxes because they are below the poverty level and 2) end all social programs like Medicare, Medicare, social security, food assistance programs, etc. by “sun setting” any social program every 5 years and requiring the new legislature to start over from scratch (unless the right has control, then forget it).

“We cannot blame republicans (for rich people not paying taxes) when HOUSE democrats have the majority” 1) the tax breaks for the rich were enacted when Republicans held the house, senate, presidency, and a supermajority in the Supreme Court…a simple majority in the house and no where else after the fact does not give Democrats the ability to repeal a horrific law.

Then he wants to blame the California legislature for local groups fighting against low income housing in their neighborhood, for zoning and construction laws that severely limit where and how you can build. Such nonsense. The housing crisis in California is not limited to the homeless, there just aren’t enough houses to buy or rent. Pretending there are just no programs to secure housing, that the legislatures just don’t care and are ignoring the issue isn’t just ignorant, it’s outright dishonest. No surprise at all considering the source. California has a housing crisis, not simply an “ignoring the homeless “ problem. Property in California is so in demand that average workers are priced out of the market and fully employed people find themselves homeless. Red states have cheap property because successful professional people don’t want to live there, which leads to more affordable housing and fewer homeless. My property has quadrupled in value over 20 years, and I’m not in any town or city.

California just approved $12 BILLION to spend on our homeless issues. Red states pass laws essentially making homelessness a crime, so many homeless migrate to “blue states” where services exist and they aren’t put in jail for sleeping in public or loitering.

Texas just made it illegal for homeless people to camp in tents.

So, Bob, tell me about the Republican plans to house the homeless in red states. About all the services and assistance they want to provide but are blocked by democrats from moving forward. Show me the high end Republican neighborhoods inviting low income housing into their neighborhoods, keeping in mind that many, even in California, are right wing neighborhoods with Republican led local government that blocks construction.

You’ve tried this nonsense propaganda before, about 6 months ago when it was originally posted if I recall, I debunked it thoroughly then. So sad @bobknight33 can’t remember anything for over 3 seconds or he would recall the last time he posted this nonsense opinion piece and I rubbed his nose in it.

Downvote into oblivion this right wing projection,

Your video, VLDL: Controversial opinion, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

If you are talking policies that govern individuals, average is meaningless, you need to include the outliers. What I really said was, on average it’s somewhat true a bit more than half the time….with many exceptions, so incredibly far from a rule…far from “I can agree”.

You said “ Are you saying you do not believe that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)?”.
I pointed to one instance where (I assume) chromosomal males do not have an advantage over a chromosomal female in an athletic field….just an example of why I don’t believe it’s always true that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)..one you can’t contradict.

People are never equally gifted or talented, not even with themselves yesterday or tomorrow. I find the premise faulty.

Appears to, so far, in most but not all categories.
In many, the difference is minimal and an exceptional female will surpass males one day in most. Top ranked Kenyan woman already routinely beat top ranked non Kenyan males in long distance running, for one example.

I won’t extrapolate from a temporary skewed position, it leads to ridiculous conclusions….so I won’t be able to agree.
I can agree people believe that.

It’s not just sexual biology. It has nothing to do with genitals. It’s hormones, dna, rna, mental toughness, upbringing, training, health, environment, opportunity, etc. if someone born a woman wants to compete with men, and your position is correct, what’s the harm? If a trans woman, born male but never going through male puberty or taking estrogen and hormone blockers to reverse the effects wants to compete against women, what proof do you have to show any advantage? Two athletes excelling? Out of how many?

Now how expert are you in this field? Expert enough to define the exact point where each person has an advantage vs a disadvantage? I doubt it. But you think it’s fine to deny them the right to participate based on your ignorant assumptions. Do you accept such ignorant, biased assumptions to determine what you may do, how much you may participate in public events? I doubt you would accept it for a second. Think about that.

You want to equate them to non trans people while trying to prove how they’re so different. Pick a lane please.

No matter what your opinion, denying a citizen a chance to compete in public sports is totally unAmerican. I notice how you ignore that, as if to concede it under your breath. It doesn’t go unnoticed that you can’t address that. It IS the point.

Edit : as to the olympics, they have allowed trans gender athletes since 2004. If trans women are really men, why haven’t those records become equal between men and women?