search results matching tag: presents

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.01 seconds

    Videos (1000)     Sift Talk (156)     Blogs (108)     Comments (1000)   

North Pole shift 1840 - 2019

moonsammy says...

I knew it moved, I did NOT realize it moved anywhere near that much. If I'm not mistaken, it's traveling south at present, which makes my brain a bit uncomfortable.

newtboy (Member Profile)

Republicans Refuse to Move On from Donald Trump

bobknight33 says...

On Thursday &7/15/21) the Arizona Senate held a hearing on the ongoing Maricopa County forensic audit.

The audit team announced there were 74,000 ballots that were received and included in the 2020 Election in Maricopa County than were mailed out.

The Cyber Ninjas CEO Doug Logan reported this along with other issues already identified from their investigation

They found 74,243 mail-in ballots with NO clear record of them ever being sent!

The audit team also announced that ballots were counted that WERE NOT on the proper paper stock and WERE NOT in proper printing alignment.

Other ballots were marked with Sharpie pens that bled through the paper.

According to elections expert Jovan Pulitzer what was presented today was just the appetizer before the main course to come!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/07/president-trump-wrecks-fox-news-bret-baier-latest-release-says-az-audit-findings-enough-already-change-outcom
e-election/

Land of Mine Trailer

luxintenebris says...

what's beef w/the Hilter youth?

can't abide w/the kill all the baby adolphs vibe. seems extreme. even by WWII standards. just the bare fact that children were used to defuse bombs isn't what one would call kosher. if that was the right of the winning side, one hell of a lot of bombs lying around in Laos and Vietnam - what about sending our Boy Scouts over to take care of the US mess they left?

anyway - not meaning to be mean - at 14 most are not at the level of being correctly called 'idiots'. if you don't know - you just f'n' don't know!

christ on a cracker...know folks who now question what they were thinking joining the Young Republicans - - - AND THEY WERE OF COLLEGE AGE!!!

what is freaky is the line "If the majority of Germans weren't complicit, the Nazis would have never come to power."

2016 mean anything? and that's the MINORITY of Americans!

christ on a cracker...what's the situation on the COVID vaccines? on voting bills? on any f'n' bill or issue in this land? the MINORITY is having their day keeping the rest in the dark.
[2nd Amendment but screw the other 26...or 24...cause 21 cancels 18 = 0]

as you said "History isn't nearly as cut and dry as it's presented, neither are war crimes"
as he said, "And as with most things, particularly in times of war, it's complicated."
but just can't get my head around putting children in a minefield. no matter the justification. that'd be just as bad as anything the nazis could ever do: lose any sense of humanity.

newtboy said:

Big assumption. Many Hitler youth made the choice to fight for Germany, and joined on their own before children were being drafted.

Land of Mine Trailer

newtboy says...

Big assumption. Many Hitler youth made the choice to fight for Germany, and joined on their own before children were being drafted.

As for those that were conscripted, is it your position that draftees are somehow immune from responsibility for murdering their neighbors, women, children, rapes, burning towns, or planting millions of landmines on foreign soil, etc? How convenient for them. I don't believe that's a popular or legal position.

I take responsibility for my actions. If their fate was mine, I would be eternally grateful I was treated so much better than I would have treated them if the tables were turned. I would be part of an invading Nazi army, trying to undo just a tiny bit of the damage we had caused, doing so at the direction of my superiors just like when I caused the situation. I would deserve execution, not release. This assumes I wouldn't have the spine to refuse to be a Nazi and be imprisoned or executed.

If the majority of Germans weren't complicit, the Nazis would have never come to power. You give them far too much credit. From the holocaust encyclopedia- "Opposition to the Nazi regime also arose among a very small number of German youth, some of whom resented mandatory membership in the Hitler Youth." Same with adults, the opposition was a minority by far, not the majority of Germans. Who told you that?

"Survived the fighting"? "Here"? "They"? Please finish your thoughts so they have meaning. You seem to be equating Nazi soldiers with the Jews they tried to eradicate. What?!?

The Geneva convention we know today was ratified in 1949. The accords of 1929 were found to be totally insufficient to protect POWs, civilians, infrastructure, etc. Yes, Germany did appear violate it's vague provisions....so did the allies. That's why it was strengthened in 49.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

What provision of the 1929 version do you claim this violates?

Articles 20, 21, 22, and 23 states that officers and persons of equivalent status who are prisoners of war shall be treated with the regard due their rank and age and provide more details on what that treatment should be.
Or
Articles 27 to 34 covers labour by prisoners of war. Work must fit the rank and health of the prisoners. The work must not be war-related and must be safe work. ("Safe" and "war related" being intentionally vague and unenforceable).
Please explain the specific violation that makes mine removal a "war crime". It's not war related, the war was over, and it's "safe" if done properly.
Since this was done at the direction of German officers, the convention as written then doesn't apply.

Death camp!!! LOL. Now I know you aren't serious.
"The removal was part of a controversial agreement between the German Commander General Georg Lindemann, the Danish Government and the British Armed Forces, under which German soldiers with experience in defusing mines would be in charge of clearing the mine fields.
This makes it a case of German soldiers under German officers and NCOs clearing mines under the agreement of the German commander in Denmark who remained at his post for a month after the surrender - this means Germany accepted that they had responsibility to remove the mines - they just had far too few experienced mine clearance experts and far too many “drafted” mine clearers with no real experience in doing so." So, if it's a war crime, it's one the Germans committed against themselves.

I'm happy to say that anything done to a Nazi soldier is ethical, age notwithstanding. Many Nazi youth were more zealous and violent than their adult counterparts. Removing their DNA from the gene pool would have been ethical, but illegal. Taking their country to create Israel would have been ethical, but didn't happen.

At the time, there were few mechanical means of mine removal, they didn't work on wet ground, they required a tank and that the area be pre-cleared of anti tank mines, they often get stuck on beaches, and had just over a 50% clearance rate, cost $300-$1000 per mine removed, and they were in extremely short supply after the war. The Germans volunteered in this instance. Now, the Mine Ban Treaty gives each state the primary responsibility to clear its own mines, just like this agreement did.

So you know, the film is fiction, not history. Maybe read up on the real history before attacking countries over a fictional story. History isn't nearly as cut and dry as it's presented, neither are war crimes.

psycop said:

These boys neither chose the age of conscription nor to go to war. Given their age and the time in the war, they would have been forcably made to fight. If you had the misfortune to be born then and there, thier fate could be yours.

Being in the German army did not imply being a Nazi, the majority of the German population were victims as well, pointlessly lead to slaughter by monsters.

Those of them that would have survived the fighting ended up here. They didn't feed them. They worked until they died. They expected them to die. They wanted them to die.

The Geneva Conventions were signed in 1929 making this an official war crime if that's important to you. I'd say the law does not define ethics, and I'd be happy to say this is wrong regardless of the treaty.

As for alternatives for mine clearance. I'm not a military expert, but I believe there are techniques, equipment, tools or vehicles that can be used to reduce the risk to operators. Frankly it's besides the point. Just because someone cannot think of a solution they prefer over running a death camp, does not mean they are not free to do so.

If you have the time, I'd recommend watching the film. It's excellent. And as with most things, particularly in times of war, it's complicated.

Man In The Women's Locker Room Is Now The Norm

JiggaJonson says...

Yes the manner she's complaining is there to draw attention and hopefully embarrassed the person. As I said above this, she's not complaining about something happening, she's just complaining that the person exists.


On your second question, I was taking a pee when my kid was in and let me be brutally honest here. I thought she was still infantile enough to file things like this into 'I don't remember ' but she piped up very articulately "daddy, let me see your body" and I swear on my grandfather's grave it's the only time I've felt genuinely self conscious around my kid. I shut the curtain to the tub and explained to her that there are boys and girls, etc. But...and don't get me wrong, I'm not wanting to wander around just naked all the time, however, I see my wife on occasion interact with her like that and I wish I didn't have to feel like worried that my own kid is going to see me naked. If she does it's not the end of the world, but I guess when I'm not doing anything wrong - I wish I didn't have to worry about it. Yes.

I know different cultures have more nuanced views of nudity. Not all nudity is inherently sexual.

Moreover, the woman never even made it clear that they saw anything. She never says they saw it

Double checking

No, she says a lot of variations of "I see" or "he has" those verb forms fit with the other hypotheticals that she lays out to make them sound as close to something happening as possible.


Note - she doesn't say "I saw" or "(s)he showed" or "(s)he had" the way one would if an event happened in the past. She's talking in present tense.

But let's assume someone saw something in a flash of a towel to garment transition. For sayings sake. Yeah... I don't think it's too much to ask that parents sit their kids down and explain "well, you know Elton John? That guy is WAYYYY more manly than these people ever want to be. These people hate manly things so much they have decided they want to be women." Or something like that.

bcglorf said:

Honest question for everyone really angry at the lady in the video. Is the problem her manner and attitude alone? That is to ask a second question, do you think it is unreasonable for a parent to not want their young daughter seeing naked penises?

Physics Professor loses $10k, face, to Veritasium

spawnflagger says...

Yes, given the evidence solely in the previous video, he presented a valid alternate hypothesis, and even 80% convinced Bill Nye.

My only problem with him (as it was presented in this video) was that he seemed sooo confident about the "divide by zero" infinite force denominator part of the equation "obvious error" that he didn't go further. "well they must be wrong because this math makes it impossible".

I do give him kudos though, because he paid on the bet.

olyar15 said:

The professor did not lose face. He had valid questions and issues with what he saw, proposed alternative possibilities that could explain the phenomenon, and accepted the answer after further experimentation and explanation.

That is how science works. Science is not a pissing match (or at least, it shouldn't be).

Change The Name' Of Confederate Statue Removal Bill

newtboy says...

They are removals of statues of confederates who denounced their part in America. No longer democrats, confederate traitors.

Another dishonest Republican pretending he isn’t in the party of racism today and for the last 50 years. Pretending it isn’t only Republicans trying to preserve confederate monuments to sedition and treason. Pretending the Southern strategy didn’t switch positions of both parties. Most Americans aren’t as ignorant of their history as you, bob, or the present...we all know what you’re trying here, but it only works on people who didn’t finish 8th grade and don’t know any American history. Go back to Parlor.

Disgracefully dishonest, @bobknight33....I expect nothing more from you. You are a liar, sir.

Why are you so dishonest, Bob. Are reality and honesty that hard to bear? You know, and we all know you know this is bullshit lies by omission. It only proves the point that Republicans know reality is against them and they don’t have an honest argument to make when you post this dishonest stupidity.

The real history of the kkk. Democrats leave this out

luxintenebris jokingly says...

have tried to watch this before, but knowing better ruins the flow.

just listen to the 'aliases' he lists...confederacy, jim crow, black codes, dixi-crats, and the kkk.

now think...think REAL hard...which party supports confederate monuments? voter suppression? where are most of these 'security' bills being passed? what group is portraying the BLM as villains? which supporters brought a confederate flag into the Capitol building?

if all those things are bad then, then they are bad now. no matter who did them, or when.

but...that jogs a thought...the author presents evidence that racism worked itself into the law. everyday life. somewhere i just heard there was some theory that includes this very belief? seemed it was critical about racial injustice embedded into US establishments? what was it called?

just own your bias. then give objectivity an hour.

...since y'all want to be up on the up and up...
https://digg.com/video/this-40-minute-video-investigation-about-the-capitol-riot-is-the-most-definitive-account-of-what-happened-that-day

The real history of the kkk. Democrats leave this out

newtboy says...

How many times are you going to try this dishonest lie by omission, because you leave out the southern strategy (actually you just deny it, la la la la la, neverhappened neverhappened, lalalalala), when the parties switched sides on social issues. After the 60's Republicans courted white racist southerners as Democrats supported civil rights for everyone.
Every single klansman today affiliated with a political party chose Republican. Every neo Nazi with a party preference chooses Republicans. Every white supremacist that votes voted Republican. +-8% of "black" voters voted Republican. They aren't as stupid as you think, people know which party doesn't think black lives matter.

This propaganda is technically correct, Democrats WERE the party of racists, but as presented it is a lie by omission, Bob, which is a lie. You know it's a lie too.

Edit: or do I misunderstand you and you post this to indicate the Republican Party is redeemable, just like the Democrats redeemed themselves from their racist, hateful beginnings? Because you are, but you need to reverse almost every position on every issue to get there, and all I see is heels digging in farther and farther on the wrong side of every issue.

White people are dumb and need to be less white

kir_mokum says...

for the most part, the people of china, japan, korea, and saudi arabia are native to those places, not invaders who often committed genocide to take control of those places and resources. there have also long been outcries to how they deal with foreigners, we just don't hear about it since we don't live there and aren't part of that media bubble. their attempts at monoculture have presented them with a variety of different issues and existential threats, japan probably suffering the most acutely right now.

vil said:

Why this is only asked of white people is what beats me. No one is asking the Japanese in Japan or the Chinese in China or the Koreans in South Korea or the Saudis in Saudialand to be more inclusive or care at all about the sad fate of non-locally sourced humans. Granted the Japanese get a bye because they are quietly polite about the whole "no foreigners welcome" thing.

Video Shows Hot Air Balloon Crashing In New Mexico

newtboy says...

You continue to use the common definition of "snuff".
Here's what the terms and conditions say.

The presence of human fatality is acceptable and not considered "snuff" if presented as a limited, incidental portion of a lengthy educational, informative news report or documentary that encompasses a much broader narrative. Our definition of "snuff" does include but is not exclusive to any short clip in which a human fatality occurs whether or not any victims are actually visible on camera.

There was no lengthy educational or informative news report or documentary here, just a short clip in which 5 fatalities occur, although not visible on camera.

I'm not trying to have it removed, just pointing out that you are actually violating the snuff rule by the sift's definition....a definition that maybe should be reexamined.

BSR said:

I believe both these videos should go straight to the heart. If it pains anyone then that is the right response for the right reason.

Edit: Technically IMO, these videos were not posted for entertainment and were not about murder therefore not snuff. It is a tragedy.

Why is that even a question?

cloudballoon says...

Singh's right. Spending money for Native to have potable water shouldn't even be a question. There's nothing more of a basic human right than having drinkable water, especially since they've suffered being under the broiling water advisory for YEARS.

However, the problem with the NDP is that everything involving doling out money on social programs is a priority. They, like the Greens, are perpetually lacking in presenting anything close to a sensible, financiable budget during elections. They don't even try. That's why the NDP was never a ruling party (at the federal level), just the occasional kingmaker.

Racing for $100

bobknight33 says...

Its not where you start in life its where you end up.

White privilege is a false statement. Its really middle class privilege. Its about education not skin color. There are plenty of poor whites as much as there are poor blacks.


Those in the back mostly without fathers.
All knowing Newt, What is the fix?

Economic hardship of those kids would be lesson if both parents were present.


Finally JOBS or lack of them are mostly due to government policies ( Fair trade / Free Trade) have decimated job opportunities for All Americans, especially low wage and entry jobs.


Make policies that bring jobs back to America. Passing bills that take tax dollars and make roads or such only create short term jobs.

Trump was right Lower business tax rates to compete on world stage stimulated economy and America started to flourish.

Sadly Biden/ Democrats want to move tax rate up which will slow down growth, if passed.


Learn???
My dad started working at 14, His dad never got passed 8th grade.
My dad went bankrupt, had a chronically ill wife ( died in early 40s due to it) and 4 kids.

He never left. He worked his ass off.

Also he broke his back in 3 places and crushed his right hand. He left the hospital to sign a house mortgage, knowing he might never work again.
With a healing back and crippled hand he drove 50 miles each way in a stick shift car for 3 years like this just to keep a roof over our heads.

I paid my own way through college, Same for my sister.

My dad says If you want it bad enough you will find a way.

So don't tell be about white privilege bull shit.

What about Black lawyers, Drs, and ball players?
They make way more coin than most white people. Do they have white privilege?

The person making minimum wage likes it enough to stay, else he will find a better paying job.


Should fines, penalties be smaller for poor people , yes.

newtboy said:

@bobknight33 , you need to watch and learn.

Racing for $100

greatgooglymoogly says...

If the video were presented that they were athletes and the white people were just average people off the street, the comment from the announcer would be warranted. That's not how it's presented however, it's shown as a random group of young people who we SHOULD all treat as equal.

If he had said "I've seen a couple of these guys run and I KNOW they are faster than all of you." then that would be relevant personal knowledge, not just a guess based on their race. The fact that they did run faster has no bearing on why he made the statement before anyone ran and should have no idea how fast they are.

luxintenebris said:

naw.

he may have known a couple of track athletes in the group. so the guarantee could be warranted.

Prejudice is a bias or a preconceived opinion, idea, or belief about something. When you act based on prejudice, you make up your mind about something and make generalizations about it before fully knowing about it. (from dictionary.com)


missing the point, anyway. here's a video in a similar vein.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LopI4YeC4I

btw: am biased against the word 'race': as if there was more than one? even with neanderthal genetics, we should retire 'race' as a descriptive term. it's a misnomer.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon