But if you cut off the bottoms of the two glasses, and place them over the pupils of the Statue of Liberty? On July 4 and only on July 4, the dawn light coming in through these lenses will cause a message to be projected on the interior of the Statue of Liberty’s head. This will be an elaborate coded message which can only be deciphered using the French-language version of the lyrics of song “Yankee Doodle.” (It was one of Lafayette’s side projects.)

May the people of Texas receive exactly what they voted for.

I think there are a whole lot of young US citizens right now watching their own relatives being deported, sometimes leaving them as orphans. ICE is creating a generation of ICE hunters that will chase them down to the ends of the Earth.

Palestine Action are heroes. We should be singing songs about them, not prosecuting them.

Remember, legality and morality are only vaguely related. Beyond the natural crimes of murder, rape, etc. laws are just politics by another name. And the wealthy and powerful write laws to advance their own corrupt interests. Many moral obligations are criminalized, and many things that if there is a Hell will surely get you sent there are perfectly legal.

Those planes deserved to be vandalized. Hell, they deserved to be set on fire. It’s a shame they weren’t destroyed completely. If those planes are being used to carry out a genocide, then they should be destroyed. That is the simple absolute moral truth. If the law says otherwise, then the law is wrong. Anyone violating it still needs to keep the consequences in mind. But outside observers should not be afraid to speak truth to power. What Palestine Action did was not wrong; it was an act of heroism. The UK should be electing these people to parliament, not prosecuting them. Want courageous leaders who will actually stand up to powerful interests and do the right thing, even when it’s hard? Well it seems you just found that exact rare kind of person right here.

Destroying planes that are bound to assist in bombing in Gaza is simply the morally right thing to do, regardless of the law. It’s no different than a Jewish resistance fighter in the 1940s setting fire to a cattle train about to go collect prisoners for transport to Dachau. Sometimes destruction of government property is the only morally correct choice available to people.

And we shouldn’t be afraid to say this. People in the UK should be contacting their politicians demanding a full pardon for these heroes.

You would have said the exact same thing about the Holocaust.

Doesn’t mean it’s not the morally right thing to do. Aircraft that are being used to bomb innocent civilians should be vandalized. Hell that’s the minimum. The morally right thing to do is to set them on fire. Legality and morality are only weakly correlated. Obviously the law says what the powerful want it to say, but that doesn’t mean it’s right or just. Setting fire to a UK plane that is being used to genocide people is no different than setting fire to an empty train in 1944 that’s about to be sent out on a run to gather up people to take them to a concentration camp. Sorry, but that’s just the simple truth of it. You can cite evil laws you want, but you might as well be citing the laws of Nazi Germany. Everything they did was legal as well.

Some things are just wrong. And enabling them is wrong. And we shouldn’t be afraid to say that. The people who vandalized those planes did nothing wrong. They’re victorious heroes. We should be memorializing them in song and story. The laws of evil men are not even worthy of consideration, beyond the practical choices of those choosing to engage in such acts of bravery and heroism.

Samuel Clemens would be proud. Read this comment in Mark Twain’s voice, and it is absolute perfection. Bravo.

We live in a two party system. Or, more precisely…we play politics as a game whose rules with great pressure encourage the formation of two parties. This is true. But those two parties are not eternal. if one or the other is weakened enough, they can be toppled from their throwns. A three party system is not stable long term. But the parties themselves are not eternal.

How about this? On the front, an image of Charles signing a decree condemning trans women as pedophiles. On the back, a painting of an obese King Charles furiously masturbating to child pornography while an anti-genocide protester is chained naked in the same bed. That’s the truest representation of the UK I can think of right now.

How about renditions of the movie Threads? That seems the most optimistic projection for the UK’s future on its current path.

Define official.

I ride an e-bike, but a scooter is tempting. The biggest reason? Theft and parking. When I take my bike, I have to spend a few minutes at every destination finding a bike rack, finding spot, and then awkwardly locking the bike up thoroughly. Then I have to also remove the lights to my bike, as those will get stolen if I don’t take them with me. So I have to find a parking space, maneuver my bike, remove and pack away the lights, and lock the bike up with a cable and u-lock. Oh and often this is in uncovered bike parking. And I live in the PNW where it’s raining half the year. In contrast, with a scooter I can just take it right in with me to whatever building I’m going into. A scooter just sounds like a whole lot less hassle.

Good thing the auto industry is funding fear mongering against automated forms of mobility!

Why wouldn’t the president of the United States visit Washington DC?

For me, the only grey area where it might be acceptable for a white person to use it in any circumstances is if they’re reading or quoting a very old work of literature. What if you’re reading Huckleberry Finn aloud? You can say, “N-Word Jim,” but that seems off. Or you be reading historical accounts. If there’s some Jim Crow-era newspaper that just openly says the N word, censoring it may actually take away from the impact of the word.

But even in these cases, there’s probably a better way to handle this than to just outright say the N word. I’m just not sure what that way is.

The Democrats don’t care about the Constitution either. Their platform certainly isn’t filled with promises to say, repeal the post 9/11 mass surveillance laws. They have zero interest in curtailing the powers of an out-of-control presidency; they just want those powers for themselves.

The PAC are heroes. We should be building statues of them. No one a hundred years from now will think Labor is on the right side of history here. We should be nominating these people for sainthood, not criminalizing them.

AKA, they’re a group of heroes and the villainous government wants to keep doing evil.

100 years from now, who would possibly doubt that PAC are the heroes here and labor are the villains? Genociders are never on the right side of history. These people are heroes.

Sounds like a classic case of both the moderates and the radicals being essential for any real change. The moderates are the hammer and the extremists are the anvil.

Society is like a bar of iron. It’s stuck in its shape and resists change. Non-violent moderate protest alone is like a hammer without an anvil. You strike the iron, but the iron ignores the blow. With moderate protest alone, the established powers simply ignore the protests. They bend and duck out of the way and nothing changes. But violent groups serve as the anvil. They hold the powers that be in place and prevent them from ducking away from the hammer blow of the moderates.

Both hammer and anvil are needed. Without the violent extremists, the moderates are simply painted as extremists and ignored. With them, the moderates can actually gain traction. Moderate protest movements don’t succeed unless there is also a violent wing. Moderates are only moderate if there is something to moderate against. Without the violent extremists, the moderates will be the ones labeled criminals and arrested, regardless of how extreme their tactics actually are.