

It’s bloody expensive to grant an appeal - hence the hesitation, especially since SCOTUS is not actually ruling law anymore
It’s bloody expensive to grant an appeal - hence the hesitation, especially since SCOTUS is not actually ruling law anymore
Well we could retroactively name all generations eligible for the 2024 vote as the measler-maler generations
And imperialistic oligarchs the 2nd largest…
No I meant acting without caring for consequences. If large parts of the brass stand their ground - without resorting to a coup (though I have the feeling that many officers are more trustworthy than most US politicians) - even Trump would have a hard time doing anything
It would not even be possible to annihilate humanity if you kill a 1000 people a day.
About 368000 people are born daily. About 150000 die daily. Which means the bad guys would have to kill about 219000 people per day to annihilate humanity in 22000 years
Protection? If you’re still only at the stage where you resist within legal grounds then the US is really done for
I think that was kind of the joke
I’ve been chosen as well Same Sender as well
Your account is 4 days old, yet you have about 2 dozen self deleted comments, how come?
At the latest since 2022 and the incredible stupidity shown by many Russians, I’ve been saying that NCD is way to credible. Should have expected the US to join the legitmization of NCD
Well a predator is just a guest if you give him consent
Quad erad demonstrantum
Well yes supposedly. But they have also sworn to protect the countries from enemies abroad and within.
From an outsiders perspective: you already have both with the latter leading the government
Also, the journalists they employ are obviously beneficiaries of the freedom of press as well as of opinion, which drastically limits the influence of the government on their reporting.
Now legally speaking, they are an independent legal person of the public law. Meaning they have been granted a degree of freedom in the DWG (Deutsche Welle Law), § 68 DWG states that there is no legal way of taking influence on their journalistic work.
Now, any further legal dive would be too much to really follow, plus I am too lazy. They are however quite a unique legal product that is a beneficiary of the constitutional rights as well as having to follow them themselves
I didn’t mean to say it in a demeaning way. DW is certainly a better news outlet than many others, especially major US ones. And how much sway the government actually has is unclear to me as well. Nevertheless their conception from day one has been and still is to be a spokesman for the German state in its entirety.
Am 3. Mai 1953 geht die Deutsche Welle von Köln aus als Hörfunksender mit einer Radioansprache von Bundespräsident Theodor Heuss erstmals auf Sendung. Gegründet von der Bundesregierung, soll sie dem Ausland die junge Bundesrepublik vermitteln und die Wiederaufnahme Deutschlands in die internationale Staatengemeinschaft medial begleiten. Taken directly from their website.
Or for those not German speaking, paraphrasing loosely: Founded by the federal government their mission was to tell the world of the young federal Germany and to help reintegrate Germany into the international community of countries medially.
My goal was not to belittle their work - I really like their work from what I’ve seen so far. However I wanted to point out that the media outlet that was founded to paint Germany in a positive - though often critical- way, is now apparently more trustworthy than a majority of major (sort of independent) US news outlets and gets cited alongside the Guardian.
But because you’re still correct on my style of writing to be quite a bit to placative, I will add a disclaimer to my initial comment.
You guys know that DW is basically German “propaganda” it is literally the German government’s news outlet. And I don’t mean in a public broadcasting kind of way.
Edit.: because this comment could be and has been seen as to placative and one-sided, pls. also take regard of my answer below.
~
This tilts people way to hard for what it is - a slightly drunk -
Simplicity is certainly a thing, but you shouldn’t forget that there’s quite a bit of survivor’s bias in that statement
Holy shit, the average dnd meet is more organised than this dumpster fire.
Pls do, but we don’t take that shit stain back