Meine Wahrnehmung der deutschen Medien ist eine andere als Deine und ich denke das es viele Wege gibt, Israels jetziges Vorgehen uu kritisieren ohne den Vorwurf des Antisemitismus zu erhalten und dass das auch gerade in den Medien passiert.

Eine wichtige Frage, die sich zu wenige Kritiker Israels stellen wollen ist, was hätte Israel, ab dem 07.10. anders machen sollen? Ich rede nicht von vor dem 07.10., da hätte Israel sehr vieles anders machen sollen und können, sonder von danach. Was hättest Du getan? Was hätte irgend ein anderes Land der Welt in einer vergleichbaren Situation getan?

This is, because it is not news but an opinion piece and reads more like a wishlist.

the looming defeat of the United States and NATO in the Ukraine War

Israel too will have to vacate its occupied territories and make space for a state of Palestine, which of course, will be a crushing defeat for the U.S. and marks the end of its global dominance.

an escalation by the Resistance is inevitable and Israel could suffer a “huge earthquake,” as Hezbollah is in a state of readiness to intervene.

Tehran will not be deterred by the deployment of two U.S. aircraft carriers and several warships and fighter jets off the shores of Israel

if the BRICS were to take a lead role at some point to navigate a Middle East peace process that is no longer the monopoly of the U.S. This is payback time for Russia.

The era of petrodollar is ending — and along with that, U.S. global hegemony. The emergent trends, therefore, go a long way to strengthen multipolarity in the world order.

A wishlist of somebody who thinks that.more power to dictatorships will somehwo mean more freedom in the world?

Maybe from the same source they get the Kalashnikov-rifles and RPG-7s that you can see them using? Those are not used by the Israeli military.

So, from each of your purported unexploded 2000 pounds bombs, Hamas will get at most 40 of the type of rocket you mention. Since they launched over 6000 rockets in the last two weeks, they would have needed at least 150 unexpkodes 2000 pound bombs only for that. Maybe they also do get weapons/money for weapons from other sources?

How many rockets did Hamas alone fire at Israel during the last 10 days? That must have been a hell lot of unexploded Israeli munitions.

True, but also maybe they remember the Black September?

Ich dachte eher an Beispiele von wirklich reichen Menschen, deren Handeln, durch das sie reich geworden sind, eindeutig von sozialem Gewissen geprägt ist.

Hast Du Beispiele?

Diese Tendenz gibt es in Deutschland leider definitiv.
Aber leider genau so gibt es in Deutschland haufenweise "Kritik", die sich in Ihrer Lautstärke und Konzentration auf Israel, obwohl es viele genau so schlimme oder schlimmere Staaten auf der Welt gibt, und ihres kompletten Ignorierens einer möglichen Schuld der Palästinenser an irgendwas, selbst deutlich als antisemitisch motiviert outet.
Darüber hinaus gibt es dann auch noch den einfachen, offenen Antisemitismus.

Und alles drei richtet sich in Deutschland immer mit gegen deutsche, jüdische Gemeinden, Einrichtungen und Personen.

Aus dem gleichen Grund, aus dem Biden dauernd von bi-partisanship redet, während die Republikaner versuchen die Demokratie abzuschaffen.

Was war denn an Knoff-Hoff so schlimm? In meiner Erinnerung versucht Herr Bublath, gemütsmäßig irgendwo zwischen Begeisterung, Fatalismus und Verzweiflung, wissenschaftliche Fakten allgemein verträglich darzustellen, während Carrrrroline Rrrrrrreiber schreit, "Gucken Sie mal! Wenn ich diese Münze (aus Bi-Metall) in den Eisblock stecke, wackelt sie hin und her!".

Sind die ganzen Weltverschlimmerer mit dem nötigen Kleingeld für solche Kampagnen wirklich alles Nazis?

Nazis vielleicht nicht, aber überlege einfach mal, was Du für eine Einstellung, besonders anderen Menschen oder der Gesellschaft gegenüber brauchst um wirklich reich werden zu wollen?
Die einzigen, die da raus fallen sind die, die ihr Wahnsinnsvermögen einfach erben, und die haben schon vorher ein Leben gelebt in denen die Privilegien und Klassenunterschiede völlig normal waren. Wo soll das soziale Gewissen herkommen?

Thank you very much for the information. I will check it out.

Incorrect, indigenous Australians used fire extensively for land management. They were the first society in the world that we have evidence of milling seed for flour (36k years ago), they had yam plantations, built stone weirs for fish farming, and a bunch of other things.

Interesting. Any sources I could look up?

That is just the thing. It was the same with GB and the IRA. Terrorist organization and the hard-line governments they oppose have a simbiotic relationship to their mutual benefit and the detriment of anybody else.

Me too.

Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute something to malice that can as easily be explained by stupidity."

Conspiracy Theory. Then why not do it earlier, when the protests were still in international news instead of now when everyone intenationally already lost interest and turned back to watching the Golden Bachelor?

If you think "we" are ignoring a conflict that is never out of the news in western nations for more than a few weeks at most and never at all in the Arab nations, what do you call what "we" do to the numerous other conflicst in Africa, the Middle East, Central and South-East Asia and South America?

So they are really arguing that the 14th Amendment only applies to the people participating in an insurrection and that the instigator of an insurrection is protected by the 1st amendment? That one will be interesting, becuse as far as I understand it, US legal tradition also holds that the instigator of a crime is as guilty as the perpetrator. The one who orders a murder is as guilty of murder as the one committing it. Or am I wrong?
Also, did they just admit that January 6th was an insurrection attempt and not a peaceful tourist viait?

Do you still not see it? Republicans claim not to believe in Climate Change because they are all Lizard People!
/s if it isn't obvious enough.

Gut. Dann sind wir uns aber trotzdem einig, dass Deine ursprüngliche Aussage, in Deutschland würde der "Großteil" des Kunstoffabfalls recycelt, falsch ist?

Nur anekdotal und deshalb mit sehr wenig Beweiskraft:
Ich habe Aussagen von Mitarbeitern der Abfallwirtschaft in meiner Heinatstadt gehört, die sagten, sie seien im lokalen Müllverbrennungswerk dafür zuständig, das von mir aussortierte Papier und den Kunststoff wieder unter den Hausmüll zu mischen, da der sonst nicht gut genug brennt und das bei uns gar nichts recycelt werde (weder Papier noch Kunststoff). Trotzdem trenne ich weiter (in der Hoffnubg, dass das nicgt/nicht mehr/bald nicht mehr stimmt.

Also würdest Du sagen, dass der Satz

Auch die These, dass Beamte im Berufsleben weniger verdienen würden als Angestellte, trifft längst nicht mehr zu.

für Deine Position nicht zutrifft, für Verwaltungsbeamte nicht zutrufft oder das er komplett falsch ist?

Sorry, jetzt kannst Du mir natürlich vorwerfen kleinlich zu sein, aber

Verbrennen ist kein richtiges Recylclen, aber...

Zusammen mit

nur noch eine Ausrede für Menschen die zu faul für Mülltrennung sind

kommt irgendwie nicht so gut rüber.

Zum Export von Plastikmüll:

Deutschland exportierte 2022 etwa 734.000 Tonnen Plastikabfälle
Quelle NABU

Da auch die als "recycelt" gelten, müssen wir die wohl leider von den 1,98 Mio Tonnen recyceltem Kunststoff abziehen. (Verschiedene Jahre, ich weiß aber ich denke die Zahl wird sich nicht so sehr geändert haben.) Damit sinkt die Recycling-Quote schon Mal deutlich auf knapp 25%.

Anders, als in dem Post weiter oben behauptet, wird also gerade nicht der "Großteil" des Plastikmülls in Deutschland recyclet.

Kunstoff ist im Endeffekt auch nur ein fossiler Brennstoff

Klar. Genau wie Gold auch nur irgendein Metall ist. Nein, Kunstoffe sind teilweise hochkomplexe Kohlenwasserstoff-Verbindungen, die wir bisher nur aus Erdöl gewinnem können. Die zu verbrennen, weil sie gut brennen, ist einfach Schwachsinn.

Mittlerweile wird in Deutschland sogar der größte Teil des Plastiks recyclet.

Hast Du da Zahlen? Denn ich habe das genaue Gegenteil gehört (zB hier: . https://www.ardmediathek.de/video/ndr-dokfilm/plastik-die-recycling-luege/ndr/Y3JpZDovL25kci5kZS8zNWM5MzkzZi0yODNiLTQ4YWEtODBkYy0zYzk2MTA0NmMxMTQ). Da wurde gesagt, dass man aufpassen muss, denn aller Plastikmüll, der ins Ausland "zum Recyclen" verschifft wird und dann in Indonesien auf eine Müllkippe gekippt wird, gilt hier als "recycelt".

"... where scientists were able to draw DNA evidence using radiocarbon dating." Ah! Gibberish!

You can behead the king or members of an aristocracy who's source of wealth and power are stiuated in one coutry, but how do you want to manage that with a billionaire whose wealth is spread all over the world? He will just move to a friendlier country.

So? He is a biilionaire. What, besides his reputation among the rabble does he have to loose? Why should he care? Does he need to fear that you will boycot his companies? Not even a bloody revolution in the US could touch him. He will just move to another country.

Ist das nur mein Eindruck aus der Berichterstattung oder streben wirklich überdurchschnittlich viele dieser Menschen eine Beschäftigung im Dienst eines Staates an, dessen Legitimität sie leugnen und schwören damit einen Meineid über ihre Verfassungstreue, „Ich schwöre, das Grundgesetz und alle in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland geltenden Gesetze zu wahren und meine Amtspflichten gewissenhaft zu erfüllen".

Oder ist es eher so, dass der Dienst für Bund und Land so desillusioniert, dass man beginnt an deren Rechtmäßigkeit zu zweifeln?

1. Not my government (Not from the US).
2. If you want to see what the reaction to an armed insurection would be, I reccomend the American Civil War. Or do you really think that today's "tyranical government" is that much more restrained than Lincoln's government was?

As far as I see it, @BaroqueInMind was trying to make two points:

1. "The real reason for the 2nd is to legit kill tyrants"
2. "(Without guns) you are a toothless removed you cant fight back without certain and pointless death."

So his points are that the 2A guarantee his right to assassinate the President, if he decides that he is a tyrant and for armed resistance againt an executive force of the government.

I argued that fighting the US government's forces with handguns and winning is a testosterone fantasy.

So where exactly is my Straw Man?

The 2A may have been meant to protect a "free state" but in today's reality, it fails to achieve this goal. On the other hand, the laws arguing from it, have lead to the greatest number of civilian gun deaths outside an active war zone.

And there I thought the young man's testosterone fantasy of you and your buddies successfully fighting off the best equipped army in the world armed only with your private gun stash was the domain of right wing loons.

Far right propaganda at its finest.

To say the Catholic church and they pope supported Nazism is a bit of a stretch.

They may not have actively supported the Nazis the whole time, but all in all I would count them as supporting, rather than opposing or being neutral. The main goal they worked for in Germany during the Third Reich was to legally secure their special institutional rights.

The Nazi Party was anti religious in ideology.

As any totalitarian thought system must see other such systems as competitors, National Socialism too saw Religions as a competittion and began working to supplant it as soon as it was entrenched enough in Germany. Before that though, Hitler took care to be especially friendly with the Catholic Church, even praising them as "the most important factor in sustaining our nations identity" in his Declaration on Governmenance in March of 1933. Even late in the war, Hitler always declared himself sent and guided by Divine Providence, without going into detail about which god or gods he was refering to.

Did Pius XII do enough, seen the circumstances of what he knew and his power? Not at all. Even the Catholic network get used for protecting nazi wat criminals.

Agreed. And he and his Church never got punished for that.

But there was at least some verbal resistance, ...

By the Catholic Church as a whole mainly from 1930 until the NSDAP was given power and Hitler showed himself to be friendly to the Catholic Church and again after the German Government failed to honor parts of the "Reichskonkordat" (a contract that assured the Church many of its institutional rights and which richly compensated it for anything it did loose and which is still in force today) but evern then only in the form of one Encyclica by the Pope mostly denouncing the loss of adherence to Catholic/Christian Dogma in Germany and only in one part denouncing the Nazi Race Theory. Aside from that, there was only resistance by singular priests.

... which was braver back then, as the pope actually lived in occupied territory

... from September 1943 until April 1945. At which time and with their already overstreched ressources no "sane" German commander would have dared attacking the Pope directly and risking public uprisings in most European (occupied and unoccupied) countries.

Constant praise by sycophants and people wanting to believe in a better future at the hand of high tech billionaires also does the trick. It works like a pump for inflatable egos.

1. Is this (world) news?
2. Where does your friend get their news? It has been reported on by multiple large US news outlets.
3. Is it also "everywhere in Russia" that China has been releasing Tritium into the sea for years, as has South Korea?
4. Is it also "everywhere in Russia" that it seems that a Rosatom subsidiary from. St. Petersburg, called Atomproekt (?) was involved in developing the filtering process for Fukushima Daiichi's release of contaminated waste water?

Unfortunately, I do not remember who the debatees where, but I once watched a debate about the existence of the Christian God in which the moderator asked both sides the most important question: what it would take for them to accept the other position as true and the atheist answered something like 'irrefutable evidence of the existence of God", while the theist said that nothing could ever make him belive that.

You do not argue with them for their sake of convincing them but to not let them spout their nonsense unchallenged and thus give other people who are not as yet set in their beliefs the impression that these "arguments" have any value.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-spirit?wprov=sfla1

Luckily, article 5, paragraph 3 has two senteces: " The arts, sciences, research and education are free. The freedom of education does not release from the loyalty to the constitution"