It’s a lot of processed bread / carb products and very little protein.

Here’s the thing too - there was an interview on the news in my country with an Israeli legal expert on sexual assault. She was pleased with the UN report investigating Hamas’ sexual assaults.

When asked if there would be a similar UN investigation for Palestinians, she said she didn’t see why the UN needed to because Palestine has its own agencies on the ground who can investigate.

Except the media also tells us not to believe anything UNWRA says because of Hamas involvement with UNWRA.

How is that fair? The Palestinian civilians are caught in an impossible trap.

I LOVE this.

4 more years - seems like the start of the Trump forever dynasty if you let him back in.

(From the perspective of a Canadian)

• after striking “severely overcrowded” Rafah ftfy

To be fair the correctional system in its current form in North America is primarily constructed and controlled by capitalist interests.

My question is: What’s in giving these interviews and making these statements for him? He’s exited the role, he’s made himself clear about the stance he took when he was in the role. Why continue to talk?

When I leave a job and go somewhere new I’m not obsessed with dragging my old workplace.

Counterpoint

Merci pour cet article. C’est un bon sommaire des issues et pourquoi les agriculteurs font cette lutte. J’étais curieuse de la cause de ces démonstrations. Les nouvelles en anglais ici au Canada n’en parlent pas. Je m’excuse s’il y a des erreurs, le français est ma langue seconde.

Fuck these guys for real. I had just set up a raspberry pi and nfc tags. I’m not buying their shitty ecosystem even harder now.

It’s an assumption that intelligent life unknown to us is space faring.

You just know Russia’s statement back to the US about this is going to be “no u.”

The conservatives in Canada have been going wild over carbon pricing.

The current government recently removed carbon taxes on home heating oil for the Maritimes, where home heating oil is used a lot, to make things more affordable during the cold winter months.

The conservatives are collectively screaming that this should be evenly applied to everyone and that home heating carbon pricing (but really all carbon pricing) should be removed. And that the PM is only doing this to retain votes in the maritimes.

Because this is a hot button issue, the conservatives are trying to claim that this legislation makes Ukraine agree to implement a carbon tax, but as is often the case with conservatives, this isn’t reality at all. In reality if I recall correctly, Ukraine needs to put in measures to reduce carbon emissions. This is something they have already agreed to do to be part of the EU.

Fascist Milhouse, the opposition leader, just wanted to spin the issue into a culture war topic that touches on a lot of things he’s been yelling about like affordability (he has no plan to improve this).

The last part is purely my conjecture: I would not be surprised if he is cozy with Russia. He was cozy with the “Freedom” Convoy in Canada that conveniently spun up right as Russia invaded Ukraine. The troll farms on Reddit were heavily commenting/ arguing/ advancing the cause of the Convoy, and Facebook groups/propaganda about it was thick. I notice that conservatives in Canada use Facebook groups like “Canada Proud” and “Ontario Proud” to advance their causes and these spin up like crazy around election time. These groups have dubious ownership at best and I suspect are foreign influence operations. Interestingly for a while the conservatives were chomping at the bit to investigate foreign interference in Canada’s election but hmmm oddly wanted to ignore Russia and focus on China instead. If you’re squeaky clean wouldn’t you want to focus on all foreign interference, no matter the source?

This, imo is also why they were trying to tie the previous speaker of the House’s dumb decision to honour a Ukrainian war vet (oops he fought on the side of Germany) to = Ukraine supports Nazis/the PM supports Nazis. That’s not reality and it was a dumb oversight by the speaker of the house and his office who has nothing to do with the PM. But I do recall that one of Russia’s favourite attacks on Ukraine is that they are Nazis so this line of attack by the conservatives here in Canada seems questionable at best.

TLDR send help, Canadians are falling for the lies of a fascist shitbird

Crime is absolutely an invented concept.

Drinking and driving used to be legal. Now it is a crime. Nothing changed except our society via our elected representatives opted to enact punishments if an individual is caught drinking and driving.

It is illegal for me to purchase or possess a firearm in Canada unless I acquire a license to do so. If I don’t meet these requirements and am found in possession of a weapon, I will be prosecuted and face jail time if convicted. However, in American states pretty much anyone can own a gun. The guns are the same; the difference is the values each society places on gun ownership and the contexts under which owning guns is a crime.

Canada has no stand your ground laws / castle doctrine. It is almost impossible to mount a defense here if you severely injure or kill someone trespassing in your home unless your life is at risk and even then it is difficult to prove that. Many US states allow people to use lethal force to protect property and there isn’t even a trial. The act in question here is the same; the difference is how our societies have invented and constructed our laws.

I am technically not allowed to cross the border into Quebec, 15 minutes away from my home, purchase a case of beer where it is cheaper, and then bring that beer back across the border to Ontario. The beer itself is not illegal. Consuming the beer is not illegal. The act of transporting the beer across provincial borders is technically a crime.

My friend has a house in Quebec. I have a house in Ontario. Cannabis is legal in Canada at a federal level. It is a crime for my friend in Quebec to grow their own cannabis for personal consumption on their own property. In Ontario, 15 minutes away, I am permitted to grow 4 plants per adult who lives in my household for personal consumption. The pot plants are the same; the social constructs surrounding the plants are not.

There are so many current examples throughout history and throughout the world of things that used to be legal or illegal in different countries, cultures, and societies that are now the opposite. Slavery, segregation, discrimination, gay marriage? Nothing has changed with these acts - society has changed their definition of what is a crime and what is not. That makes crime something that is invented by humans, the nature of which constantly changes.

If you were one of the last 2 people on earth and the other person killed all of your livestock, has a crime been committed? How can a crime be committed if there is no social contract which dictates what the consequences should be for that act?

Crime is ABSOLUTELY a social construct. Why was it legal several months ago to have an abortion across the US but now several states are criminalizing the same? Have abortions changed? No - politics did, I would argue spurred on by the desire for capitalists to keep a steady supply of low wage uneducated exploitable desperate workers.

Why is it suddenly criminal in the state of Georgia to give food and water to people lining up at polling stations? Because one class wants to make it uncomfortable and inconvenient for another class, and I would argue race, of people to vote.

For more, from Harper’s Magazine “Legalize It All” (How to Win the War on Drugs):

At the time, I was writing a book about the politics of drug prohibition. I started to ask Ehrlichman a series of earnest, wonky questions that he impatiently waved away. “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”

Same as it ever was - criminalizing social classes to disempower them is the name of the game. If you aren’t wise to this you haven’t been paying attention.

Adding - it’s illegal in Japan for me to possess and consume cannabis but perfectly legal in Canada for me to do the same.

It would be illegal for me to walk around in certain countries without a headscarf, how is that not a social law?

It’s illegal in Russia to speak against the war, and people have been imprisoned for the softest infractions of this. In North America I have free speech in this regard.

Not familiar with the laws of California but I think the spirit of the post is that the cops will be on your ass immediately and you will be put in jail if you walk with $100.

If your boss steals $100 from you it then becomes a matter for the courts before anyone in the company faces even the slightest threat of jail.

I’d add Wilhoit’s Law: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect”

But I’d adjust: “North American Democracy consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups (the rich) whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups (workers) whom the law binds but does not protect

I have several colours of these. They are the best!

Idk maybe when there’s not a huge humanitarian crisis. Gotta deal with the humanitarian crisis first or find somewhere for these people to go with actual resources for them. I wouldn’t want to be operated on in a hospital without electricity or anaesthesia, and I’m certainly not wishing that on civilians here.

Asking despotic governments in charge to do what’s right never works. Why should civilians be punished?

I feel for the civilians caught in the middle. Now is not the time to be hard headed about asking a terrorist group to do what’s right. Obviously they don’t care and the civilians are being punished too. Being callous about their suffering doesn’t solve the situation… it just feeds into the terrorist narrative.

And what happens if UNWRA does just that? Then they’ll be shamed and accused of working with a terrorist organization. It’s a no-win situation.