Take that Russia

MOSCOW, Aug 20 (Reuters) - Russia's first moon mission in 47 years failed when its Luna-25 space craft spun out of control and crashed into the moon after a problem preparing for pre-landing orbit, underscoring the post-Soviet decline of a once mighty space programme.

Russia's state space corporation, Roskosmos, said it had lost contact with the craft at 11:57 GMT on Saturday after a problem as the craft was shunted into pre-landing orbit. A soft landing had been planned for Monday.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/race-moon-resources-has-begun-says-russias-space-chief-after-failed-lunar-2023-08-21/

Bullshit. Maybe if it was some minor story it could be shunted to page two if there are enough paid adds and sites that pay for preferential treatment. A major revelation like that, with evidence not just crackheads claiming it,could never get off page one of a search. It’s not there because it’s utter bullshit made up by professional bullshit artists to excuse their cohorts from treason and murder....or perhaps because there are a dozen professional fact checks that all debunked it and the original claims have been retracted and taken down by their original posters. (That’s what politifact indicates)
They do not “hide” pages, and they aren’t the only game in town.

The one bit of evidence I can find on the subject is the photo of Trumpsters taking selfies with capitol police that some nut job said proves they are ANTIFA agents working with police to frame Trumpsters....too bad those people have actually been identified as long time trumptards. There was also a claim that facial ID software identified many as ANTIFA, but the company itself said it identified white supremacists and other far right extremists, no ANTIFA. That claim is gone because it was retracted when the truth came out.
Just admit you bought the lie and made it up. If that weren’t the case, you absolutely could have proven me wrong by now, instead you are taking this red herring “it’s been hidden by google” lie as far as you can in hopes you won’t get called out again for just making up bold faced lies, again.

It’s a pure bullshit lie. ANTIFA did not instigate the attempted Trump coup, Trumpsters did, and they planned it online, documented and verified, some for months. Every person asked said Trump directed them to go there and “stop the steal” by “fighting hard” and “not allowing Biden to be declared president” and “getting rid of representatives like Cheney and others that are weak”. Not one said some hipster said attack congress so I did. It’s a transparent, baseless, evidence free excuse for treason. No body is buying it, it’s just so stupid a lie to start with. You need an IQ below 75 to think it MIGHT be true.

Really don't know why they chose to go this route with the IP. Except for the the fact that it was bought out and they shunted Del Toro to being only the Producer, while putting into place an entirely new script and director.

I will probably wait for this one to hit the discount theatre or Redbox.

Please do give us a closer look at ISIS is doing. Massacres, torture, rape, collective punishment and on, correct? Maybe killing what, 100 people at a time in the worst instances? That doesn't distinguish them from Saddam. Within Saddam's rule those crimes are what guys like yourself colloquially referred to as Saddam's 'firm' hand. They are his, so to speak, lesser and more routine crimes. I'd left them beneath mention thus far.

If you must insist on parroting your ignorance of Saddams al-Anfal campaign I'll resort to posting excerpts as evidence that the gassing was but a small part of it.

4,500 Kurdish villages were destroyed by Saddam, that's entire villages turned to rubble.
182,000 dead civilians by counts gleaned from Saddam's own records of how many Kurds his forces had succeeded in eliminating.
The concentration camps Saddam ran were pretty clearly modeled after Hitler's:
With only minor variations ... the standard pattern for sorting new arrivals [at Topzawa was as follows]. Men and women were segregated on the spot as soon as the trucks had rolled to a halt in the base's large central courtyard or parade ground. The process was brutal ... A little later, the men were further divided by age, small children were kept with their mothers, and the elderly and infirm were shunted off to separate quarters. Men and teenage boys considered to be of an age to use a weapon were herded together.

The conditions within the camp were terrible and torture, abuse and beatings were routine. The men of fighting age though were sorted for the express purpose to later drive them out into the desert by bus or truck for mass execution. This is how Saddam carried his genocide of the inhabitants of the 4,500 villages he'd destroyed.

Anyone interested in more or questioning the veracity of the above account can find more and endless references and evidence here:
http://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/index.htm#TopOfPage

As for American policy, I don't quite see where I suddenly bear personal responsibility to clean up the world if I choose to form my opinions on world events independently of it's 'fit' to American policy.

I don't care much if it was Bush or Putin that took Saddam out of power aside from hedging on which would leave a better Iraq, either would be tough not to be an improvement from Saddam. Similarly for Sudan or the Congo, I'd be rather glad if world powers finally cared enough to try and spare the people there suffering under brutal military repression and endless war crimes. I'm not quite sure why you wouldn't share such a view?

As for the genre of detective fiction, I believe that was originated by one Neville Shunt, and demonstrated by Monty Python:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vhc1hWXH5IM

Until all that dark shit you have been suppressing finally overwhelms your armour of contempt and you either:

A. Have such a cripplingly dark and nihilistic episode of backed up depression you finally kill yourself.

B. Break all the way through to a state of catatonic schizophrenia and need to to institutionalised.

or

C. Snap the other way and go on a self righteous violent rampage (think "Falling down" on a smaller scale)

"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." -Friedrich Nietzsche


"The abyss" (of the futility at the core of the human condition) will never be your friend. Embracing it will only blind you to the entropy you are now helping to facilitate.


I'm a student of Epistemology (philosophy) and I'm absolutely no stranger to nihilism. It's a crucible anyone that wants to understand "reality/truth" has to go through. But its only 50% of the equation and offers only futility and darkness.

The other side is simple: if there is no God or ultimate truth then we ourselves are as Gods because we can choose our own purpose and reality (to a point mind!). Life can be virtually anything you want it to be.


Now on some level what you have quoted/suggested there would fall into this category, you would be making a positive choice to define your own reality. However the reality you are defining is a mirror to the abyss you are trying to escape, it is akin to trying to fight a monster. You will surely become/have become the monster you are fighting.

How do you think the monsters that make one feel so depressed in the 1st place come into being? They were staring into "the abyss" too!



Do you just want the depression to go away for a while? Or do you want to replace it with something beautiful instead? (or was this whole thing a Joke that I missed?)


Philosophy/pshychobabble aside what you are describing there basically = shunting all your negativity onto others around you. "If I take out all my shit on other people I don't feel so bad".

This seems like a less than ideal solution and is basically what one of my best friends does when he feels down. When he does so it makes me and others that know him seriously question why we put up with him.

I have nothing but sympathy for people that feel that "special darkness", but taking it out on others is not something I'm willing to tolerate from people I know. It's the main reason half of us are in this mess in the 1st place. People who don't give a fuck how the things they say and do will affect those around them, are pretty hard to keep giving a fuck about . "An eye for an eye will blind the world"

we're definitely not shrinking the military. It's just that a lot of the money gets shunted over to the private contractors. more than what goes to the troops themselves probably. The contractors get to buy homes in Dubai, while the troops themselves are stuck in the trenches.

Fuck Me! (but please don't give me a priapism shunt)

@NinjaInHeat go ahead, throw away your money paying higher taxes, no one's stopping you, but it won't give you any moral authority to demand higher taxes for other people.

I'd seriously like to understand what justifies a corporation paying progressively more taxes than the rest of us. Aren't we trying to right a wrong here, are profits in the hands of a productive entity or person something inherently bad for society? Should it be transferred to government instead, who is much better at wasting resources than petty cost-conscious businessmen?

Your hatred towards all corporations is misplaced because, believe it or not, they don't all conspire to enjoy the same amount of freedom and privileges. Government is stepping in and benefitting a select few at the expense of many. In this awful economy, many corporations have gone bankrupt or are struggling to get by, while a few benefit from massive bailouts and federal contracts handsomely paid for with the debasement of our currency and heavy taxes you so fiercely want all corporations to pay.

To me, that's neither representative of capitalism, nor of a healthy functioning society.

I think you're mistaken in your understanding that we have any substantial power or responsibility for the actions of our governments. In a democracy, your participation outside of a more influential circle is mostly symbolic. Sure, you can vote and run for office, but that limited capacity for involvement shouldn't be an excuse to shunt any criticism of government.

In this case it means a crash. It usually means push, or move aside, as in moving railway trucks around and the medical and electrical terms derive from this usage, i.e. moving stuff around.

Google "hunt the shunt" for James Hunt, who got the nickname from his crashes early in his career.
>> ^Yogi:

What's a shunt other than something medical or electrical? What did you mean by Shunt?

What's a shunt other than something medical or electrical? What did you mean by Shunt?

Bill Gates - and all the ProgLibDytes on the forum - entirely miss the point.

You could take every single member of the top 5% of the United States and immediately confiscate 100% of all their wealth, income, assets, property, and leave them penniless paupers in the gutter. It would not so much as balance the Federal Government's budget for one QUARTER, let alone a whole fiscal year. The problem is not that taxes on the rich are too 'low' (they certainly aren't). The problem is that government spends too much money on crap that government has no business spending so much as one thin dime on (IE all the social programs). Government has over-promised on too many things to too many groups for far too long. They foot a bill too long for their purse and can't pay it - no matter how much it taxes the rich, corporations, or anyone else.

Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Warren Buffett's secretary (also rich), Hollywood, and all the other rich idiots with their crocodile tears about not being taxed enough... Every single one of these hypocrites has the address of the National Treasury, and can write out checks giving every penny they earn to the government. They can fire thier accountants tomorrow and not use all the exemptions they fight so hard to maximize. They don't need thier taxes raised. They could pay higher taxes this very instant under current law.

So why don't they? Simple. They know government is a terrible place to put money.

Gates is dumping money into private philanthropical efforts - which shows that he hasn't completely lost his wits (even though he's talking like a total moron in this clip). No one believes that giving the government more money is a good idea. The US government is one of the most wasteful, and least efficient organizations on the planet. Bill Gates knows this. So it isn't hard for him to figure out that "the nation" would be better served dumping his money in an incinerator rather than pay the Feds more tax money.

So what's with these hypocritical screeds that rich sleazeballs like Buffett? The answer is also quite simple. They are doing nothing more than mouthing platitudes specifically to assuage all you ProgLibDyte peons with your class warfare pitchforks.

It is quite amusintg, really, just how easily and thoroughly people on the left like the Sift are duped. All Gates has to do is go on a show here, or a show there, and say a few of the correct leftist catchphrases. Then suddenly all the lemmings are literally knocking each other over to be the first in line to start french kissing Gates or Buffett's duodenum.

See - that's what's so funny. You ProgLibDytes don't care that Gates is laughing his way to the bank, and that he will NEVER pay a cent more in taxes than he has to. Oh no. That doesn't matter. All that matters to all you agenda slaves is that he blathers the right sound bite at you. Then your ideological addictions get thier nice little junkie fix, and you're putty in his hands, laughing at you because he knoew (A) he isn't going to pay more taxes and (B) all he has to do is keep shunting a few bucks at the right leftist radicals and he will have political protection payola shielding him for life. And all he needs too keep the racket going is a bunch of you simpletons brainlessly following your left-wing marching orders so he has a permanent audience to sing to. How's it feel knowing you're the intellectual equivalent of Bill Gates' used condom?

I think you should consider a temporary-permanent change to the website to follow up the black out day until SOPA is voted on. Then if it passes, consider a week long blackout as a "simulation". In either case, keep the information available and on your website whether it passes or fails, because if it fails they will be trying to pass something near as bad.....SOPA-lite if you will within a year...secretly if they can.

Change the background of the website to either an anti-SOPA graphic or black and have a link to all the blackout events and news surrounding it. Plus all of the SOPA material you collect here. Keep the comments separate from the information, so people can be left to form their own opinion on it instead of reading comments before the info is presented.

Perhaps consider making a *SOPA tag, so you can shunt people to videos covering it easily. And make it stand out until the vote is over.

9/11 Motivated Excessive Fiscal Spending

The wars are a tiny portion of the debt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/02/osama-bin-laden-dead-war-on-terror-costs_n_856390.html

"If Congress also approves the president’s FY2012 war-funding request, the cumulative cost of post-9/11 operations would reach $1.415 trillion"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

"As of October 22, 2011, the gross debt was $14.94 trillion."

This is not even addressing the point that the Iraq war had nothing to do with 9/11. You're going to have to explain your lack of conservative bona fides when Bush was in power another way.

Banks should have been allowed to fail

Not bailing out the banks would have trashed the economy. When banks fail, financing dries up, businesses can't meet their short term cash flow requirements and they default. The economy collapses. The end. It doesn't matter how you're ideologically attuned to government assistance in times of crisis, that this would have happened is simply a fact.

Better yet follow it through further. When banks collapse, without federal deposit insurance, individuals lose their personal savings. How far would you follow through your rigid and impractical ideological principles? Would you say free markets dictate they lose their savings for the bad judgement of those in the financial services industry.

Keynesian Fiscal Policy Works

Every other major economy is doing it. Take a look at how much China spent and how it's barely sputtered in growth. Every economist worth a damn is saying the US is not spending enough to prop up the economy. That whatever you're reading is drawing a comparison FDR rather than you know, something in the last 50 years should tell you they're full of the BS.

If you go back and read forecasts for unemployment before Obama was inaugurated, none of them expected to fall significantly or quickly in a short period of it. The prolonged European debt crisis has exacerbated that. Unemployment falling marginally is not evidence that stimulus spending does not work.

Look, what is it about fiscal spending that you don't understand? Economic uncertainty in Europe. Businesses don't know what demand will be like, so they sit on their money instead of investing or hiring more workers. Countries face that risk that as they wait, short term unemployed become long term unemployed because they've been out of the workforce and skills atrophy. So they spend in the short term to keep people employed or incentive through deductions for companies to hire. Tax cuts improve returns marginally. Spending to keep people employed reduces the cost of social services in the long-long term from people being shunned out of the workforce. You spend but you make your money back over time.

It's simple. And it makes perfect logical sense.

How is it that hard to understand?

The rest

I'll be honest, your writing manner makes you look stupid when you're trying to make factual arguments. Have you seen a newspaper article or dissertation written like this? No. Exactly.

FYI, I live in Australia. We have free hospital visits, virtually no government debt, almost record low unemployment and we never went into a recession. Funnily enough Keynesian fiscal policy works over here, must be an anomaly though.

>> ^quantumushroom:

The question that can't be answered is whether Bush would've spent like the amateur liberal he is without 9-11. There was plenty of criticism leveled at Bush by the right during his tenure. The left was so focused on ensuring America lost in Iraq it didn't have time to thank Bush for rubber stamping all of their usual failed social "programs".
The failouts and scamulus sealed Bush 43's legacy as a failure. Everyone should've been "allowed" to fail.
Now enter His Earness. Questionable background, no experience, gets shunted through by obeisant media fawns. Tries the same Keynesian BS that FDR did with predictable results. As FDR's antics prolonged the Depression by a decade, so His Earness has spent and spent with nothing to show for it but enormous new debt (and no WW2 to save his bacon). Now this regime's media says with a straight face that the scamuli "prevented even worse unemployment". Hippie PLEASE.
We've now had six years of Taxocrats running Congress...what's better now than before?
You are going to have to defend the indefensible next year. Be sure to vote November 3rd.




>> ^RedSky:
@quantumushroom
QM, my problem with your point of view is throughout Bush's term, you didn't appear to have any issues with his profligacy as he (and the Republican congress at the time) pushed through bill after a bill that took the country massively into debt. Now your concerns are presumably that in the worst economic crisis in 60 years, the Democrat government is spending too much to prop up the economy and prevent the skills of the short term unemployment stagnating and turning into the long term unemployed dependent on social benefits.
Where are your standards here?
Or your consistency?

The question that can't be answered is whether Bush would've spent like the amateur liberal he is without 9-11. There was plenty of criticism leveled at Bush by the right during his tenure. The left was so focused on ensuring America lost in Iraq it didn't have time to thank Bush for rubber stamping all of their usual failed social "programs".

The failouts and scamulus sealed Bush 43's legacy as a failure. Everyone should've been "allowed" to fail.

Now enter His Earness. Questionable background, no experience, gets shunted through by obeisant media fawns. Tries the same Keynesian BS that FDR did with predictable results. As FDR's antics prolonged the Depression by a decade, so His Earness has spent and spent with nothing to show for it but enormous new debt (and no WW2 to save his bacon). Now this regime's media says with a straight face that the scamuli "prevented even worse unemployment". Hippie PLEASE.

We've now had six years of Taxocrats running Congress...what's better now than before?

You are going to have to defend the indefensible next year. Be sure to vote November 3rd.








>> ^RedSky:

@quantumushroom
QM, my problem with your point of view is throughout Bush's term, you didn't appear to have any issues with his profligacy as he (and the Republican congress at the time) pushed through bill after a bill that took the country massively into debt. Now your concerns are presumably that in the worst economic crisis in 60 years, the Democrat government is spending too much to prop up the economy and prevent the skills of the short term unemployment stagnating and turning into the long term unemployed dependent on social benefits.
Where are your standards here?
Or your consistency?