#the start of a police state...

[intelligentchristianlady]

Be warned. Amazon is removing a key privacy setting from Echo devices. Voice recordings will now be sent to the company by default. Big Brother is watching you...

[bidoofenergy]

pleas please ambrosius is the model knight, he's what all knights should aspire to be, he comes from the right family he does well in training, he's the model knight, he works within an institution because it benefits him--as long as he works in it, because the second the director thinks he's questioning things too much she kills him--are you picking up what im putting down? he keeps his true feelings buried--never show doubt, don't show conflict, keep your head down, do what you're told, aren't you so lucky to have this chance, aren't you glad you were born as you are and not like the others--are you hearing what im saying

(listen to eugene lee yang talk about this on the trypod)

[gaspexclamationpoint]

Marble hornets x Slendermansion AU but instead of Hoodie and Masky being proxies they also live in a small cabin in the same woods and are constantly trying to sabotage the creeps plans. Hoodie learns Jeff is supposed to kill some random family and follows him there to purposely set the home security system off and Masky jumps out of the closet and tackles Jeff. They all run away to their own homes afterwards when the cops are called. The Operator/Slenderman could put a stop to it if he so pleased, but finds the shenanigans amusing.

[localvillagecryptid]

Can someone please explain to me what the enforcers Do. Like I was under the impression that they were the police force. So why the hell were they fighting in the war? Does Piltover not have an army? Are their police force and their military the same thing? Are you telling me each individual enforcer is trained both in police/investigative procedure AS WELL AS military tactics and strategy? 1) how the fuck do they have the time to invest THAT MUCH into each enforcer. 2) how fucking long is the training, especially considering how quickly Caitlyn joined the force 3) are you telling me the chief of police and the army general are the same thing? Are you telling me MARCUS was a trained tactician? A GENERAL?

Even if you argue they're all incompetent- are you telling me the Councilors were willingly paying what was probably exorbitant amounts of money to have a WEAK and ILL-TRAINED MILITARY? it's one thing for them to poorly train a bunch of cops, and maybe even carelessly allow a bunch of barely trained, "mindless gruntwork" soldiers- but eventually, the more they rise into the ranks, the more they'll have to scrutinize their skill. Are you saying their enforcers are structured like a standing army? Are you saying those pompous fucks wouldn't care if their military was actually capable of protecting them or not? How have they never been invaded before? How are they still around?!

[soup-mother]

I do empathise with yanks complaining about "Europe" and people acting like their countries are perfect compared to the US and not looking at the shit on their own shoes, but like... I mean.....the US *does* have army bases in those countries? like i get the point that they're all horrible countries but there's a pretty big difference in scale here when one of these countries has army bases in half the world and the others are holding on to relevance by drowning refugees in the Mediterranean.

[gxlden-angels]

Bro I hate fundamentalists and culturally-fundie parents they'll say shit like "spare the rod spoil the child am I right haha yea my parents used to have to beat my ass with a switch almost everyday but I sure did learn my lesson" but like??? no you didn't??? you were hit multiple times for something you very obviously did not, in fact, learn

Like studies about how harmful even lightly spanking children is aside, you're literally contradicting yourself?? Some even admitted they got worse as they got older cause they wanted to see how far they could push their parents before they got punished

And studies not aside, you're gonna get child raising advice from the same book that tells you to stone your wife if her hymen doesn't break on your wedding night instead of the decades of research we have now?? Just say you're a bad parent and move on my guy. Skill issue

[eddiediazenjoyer]

whatever. no athena is not a "mishandled" character she is handled exactly the way that they want to handle her. she is not "at odds" with the rest of the show she is a vessel for a pro-police state message that is at the center of the show whether you like it or not. she is the titular cop in a copaganda show. do not forget this bc she had one singular episode where she realizes that incarcerating people is Bad Sometimes (but not on principle but bc it makes the cop sad :(. ) like. that whole storyline was still rife with copaganda (her being allowed by the Plot to exercise abuse of power by literally locking that guy in a trunk)(the dichotomy that they CONSTANTLY show between Bad Cops and Good Cops)(dennis saying that he won't accept the deal without athena's permission, implying that he Deserves that kind of punishment unless athena frees him from it and that prison absolved him in some way)(even them having the Real Bad Guy that's dichotomized against dennis being a child molester is fucking copaganda like. it's classic. they always remind you that Well we actually need cops and prisons bc then what do we do with people like him??? the really scary guys??? THAT'S COPAGANDA) like. that's the story. this in not undone by her not... what. arresting him on the spot and banning him from taking the deal????? talk about bare minimum. ik it's complicated and like. i like this show too but goddamn the bar is on the floor and it's crazy how easily people fold as soon as the Cops Are Good show has the cop show one moment of complexity regarding prison. guys. it's still the Cops Are Good show by DESIGN. it's not incidental

[pilonciillo]

lol didn’t think someone giving money would give me anxiety

[gillespiejr]

Harvard Had It Coming. That Doesn’t Mean Trump Is Right.

another banger from the Free Press

Faced with Trump administration threats to cut billions in federal funding unless it allowed sweeping new government supervision of its operations, Harvard University had a two-letter answer: “No.”

And so the university finds itself facing the loss of $2.2 billion in support and a potentially open-ended conflict with a president who, for the moment at least, exercises total control over the levers of power in Washington.

You can’t help but admire Harvard for its willingness to take this financial hit on behalf of its principles, when other institutions Trump targeted—notably big-name law firms and Ivy League peer Columbia—caved.

In fact, it’s hard to see how Harvard could not have pushed back. As laid out in an April 11 letter, the conditions the administration sought to impose on Harvard, in the name of combating antisemitism, allegedly racially discriminatory DEI, and allegedly biased “intellectual conditions,” appeared even more intrusive than those to which Columbia reluctantly submitted—without, so far, definitively appeasing the administration.

There was no way, consistent with academic freedom, for Harvard to accept the administration’s demand to “audit the student body, faculty, staff, and leadership for viewpoint diversity, such that each department, field, or teaching unit must be individually viewpoint diverse.” Actually, it’s not immediately clear how such a provision could be precisely defined, let alone consistently enforced.

And this was one of several such proposed conditions that Harvard’s president, Alan Garber, correctly described as an attempt “to control teaching and learning at Harvard and to dictate how we operate.”

If the administration were sincerely interested in the very real problems of antisemitism and intellectual diversity on campus, the university plausibly argues, it might have given Harvard credit for positive steps it has taken since coming under pressure, both internal and external, 15 months ago over its feckless response to anti-Israel campus protests and antisemitic incidents on campus.

And yet any sympathy for Harvard has to be tempered by the knowledge that the school—and others like it—brought much of their current predicament on themselves.

The expression “they’re framing a guilty man” comes to mind. This is the university that once penalized a law professor, Ronald Sullivan, for serving as legal counsel for Harvey Weinstein, widely reviled as an accused rapist, but constitutionally entitled to a defense. Harvard subsequently promoted another dean to president, Claudine Gay, who gave key verbal support to student protests against Sullivan.

This is a school that once tried to strong-arm a quarter of its students into abolishing their single-sex clubs, fraternities, and sororities, because “their fundamental principles are antithetical to our institutional values.”

And of course, this is a university whose response to antisemitism on its campus includes a high-level task force that has still not published final recommendations more than a year since Garber established it.

That prompted one of his predecessors, Lawrence H. Summers, to complain on X March 3 that “Harvard continues its failure to effectively address antisemitism.”

Harvard was already paying a price for all this.Before the Trump administration got into the act, Harvard’s very own alumni were cutting its cash flow in protest: Donations fell 14 percent during fiscal year 2024.

Still, there’s a huge difference, legally and constitutionally, between a federal threat to withhold funding and a private one.

To be legitimate the former has to follow the law, and under the relevant civil rights statute—Title VI—the government is required to formally document allegations such as those the administration is making against Harvard, and to cut funding only to the specific programs that have been found to discriminate. The Trump administration has yet to do that.

For all of the above reasons, Harvard stands a good chance of winning this struggle in the courts of law, but a not as good one in the court of public opinion.

The post–World War II system that channeled billions of dollars into higher education rested on specific statutes, to be sure, but its deeper source of authority was a broad consensus to the effect that colleges and universities, epitomized by Harvard and the other Ivies, are reliably competent and public-spirited.

That consensus is gone or nearly gone, torn apart by grievances that range from cancel culture to exorbitant tuition to complaints—originating on the feminist left—about allegedly rampant rape and sexual harassment.

According to a 2024 Gallup poll, Americans are divided among those who have a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in higher education (36 percent), some confidence (32 percent), or little or no confidence (32 percent). A decade ago, 57 percent had a great deal or quite a lot of confidence; only 10 percent had little or none.

And within this decreasingly popular sector, the Ivy League, once admired, is now the least popular—as the administration knew.

Harvard tempered its defiance of the Trump edicts ever so slightly just after announcing it. The first published version of a letter from Garber had said that Harvard “will not negotiate over its independence or constitutional rights.” A second, amended version vowed only that the school “will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.”

To be sure, Harvard’s actions since the funding cutoff—lawyering up, taking out a $750 million loan—suggest it is girding for a long fight.

But that change in Garber’s letter signals that, for all its bold talk this week, the university isn’t ruling out the same approach other institutions settled on: a deal with Donald J. Trump, for the money.

[biblicalhorror]

Thinking about one of the loser men I dated directly post-college who, after I showed them Dirty Computer [the emotion picture] by Janelle Monae, said they "prefer rap that has something to say"

[scatteredshowersposts]

1. Hasta la Raiz - Natalia Lafourcade

Pienso que cada instante sobrevivido al caminar Y cada segundo de incertidumbre Cada momento de no saber Son la clave exacta de este tejido Que ando cargando bajo la piel Así te protejo Aquí sigues dentro (I think that every moment I survive this walk And every second of uncertainty Every moment of not knowing Are the exact key to this woven fabric That I carry below my skin That's how I protect you You're still here inside)

2. Habbaitak Be El Saif - Fairuz حبيتك بالصيف حبيتك بالشتي نطرتك بالصيف نطرتك بالشتي وعيونك الصيف وعيوني الشتي ملقانا يا حبيبي (I loved you in summer, I loved you in winter, I waited for you in summer, I waited for you in winter, Your eyes in summer, my eyes in winter, We did not meet my love)

3. No Voy a Decir Que No - Ximena Sariñana Pero si cruzas mi camino Con toda la intención Ignorando la experiencia No voy a decir que no (But if you cross my path With intent Ignoring experience I won't say no)

4. Say the Truth and Run - Meryem Aboulela

Throw out the truth and Face it widely Get your facts straight Think it widely Break the walls

5. James Joint - Rihanna How you live and love like 'fuck rules'? Don't care why just know I love you.

6. Te Regalo - Carla Morrison

Déjame quedarme aquí Déjame besarte ahí Donde guardas tus secretos Los más oscuros y los más bellos Let me stay here Let me kiss you there Where you keep your secrets The darkest, and the most beautiful

7. Victory - Janelle Monae

Oh, I'll keep singing songs until the pain goes If loving you means fighting till the end Then I'll fight harder, baby, just to win And if tomorrow shall come to me I'll count your every kiss as a victory

8. It's a good day (to fight the system) - Shungudzo The birds are in the trees They're singin' me a melody La-la-la-la, fuck the police

[125storejuice]

Okay small rant time !!!!

[motoroil-recs]

I suppose this counts as a kinfession. I just wanted to state how sometimes it gets really frustrating to see sentients who are kin with a not binary character that uses they/them (see Kris from Deltarune) and them then using he/him. I get that it is their own memories and literally them, but I suppose after a while it feels like some sort of erasure to me? I hope that makes sense, and if anybody could explain more to make me more comfortable with this specific thing, that would be lovely as well. I always want to keep an open mind.

🏎️‼️

[dannybobany]

"1-800-Sins" by R.I.P. gives me the vibe of like secret detective or smth. Like some alley way & talking with thugs, and just trying to make the world a better place.

But. In a secretive manner

Ooooufh I like that … Betty perhaps

That entire soundtrack is sooo good I love it so much idk if you knew it was a soundtrack I didn’t when I found it but if you didn’t you should check out the other songs it’s good stuff !!! Despite that it’s part of a soundtrack that pairs with a specific animation I feel like the songs carry so much emotion with them apart from their context to where you can apply them to other context and still make sense

Like how I put mommy on Cecil’s playlist, it does have a particular moment it was meant for but I think the title and the music when reapplied to Cecil’s situation still makes sense it’s just that kind of instrumental

Anyway, 1-800 sins! I agree with that particular reapplication of the song I think it makes a lot of sense- hehehehe I said this already but I love your song interpretations

[batshit-auspol]

For those that aren't in Australia right now, we have the funniest scandal going on.

Firstly let us introduce you to the eye of the storm: Sam Kerr. Sam is a women's soccer player who has in the last year become one of the most famous and beloved athletes in Australia. Captain of the women's national team, Sam became something of a cult figure after the last Women's Soccer World Cup became a complete unpredicted sensation in Australia, with the whole country getting behind the team.

Sam, up until now, has had probably one of the most squeaky clean images in sport. Generally in Australia it is not uncommon for our sports stars to be caught up in scandals involving drugs:

violence:

drinking their own urine:

or if you're cricket legend Shane Warne, probably all three at once.

Contrasting all this, Sam's image as the squeaky clean saviour for sport made it all the more shocking this last week, when it was announced that Kerr was to face trial after having been charged by the UK police of a "racially aggravated offence" involving a taxi driver.

This was shocking news. Nobody knew what to make of it. Sam was a model for young girls everywhere and a national treasure. "This is why we can't have nice things" screamed the nation. It seemed like all hope was lost.

That is, until, yesterday, when the UK police finally revealed the full details of the case, in which Sam Kerr, sporting legend, was arrested for vomiting in a cab, and then telling an intervening police officer that he was a “stupid white bastard”.

Now we probably don't need to point out that in Australia, vomiting in a taxi and then calling a cop a bastard is about as close to a national culture as we have.

You could not have come up with a better headline to make someone a national hero.

Needless to say, Sam in now being hailed down under as the greatest legend that ever lived, and a petition has already been started to have her picture added to the $5 note.

The tide has swung so far that not one, but TWO, state Premiers have spoken out in support of Kerr, and the Prime Minister has even gone on the record describing her as "a delight".

And so ends the racial abuse saga of our greatest sports hero of all time, and the very first reverse milkshake duck to ever exist.

[headknight-oh]

Just noticed that there hasn’t been much, if any, coverage on the mangione trial in like a month. Like since he plead not guilty, there hasn’t been any major coverage on the proceedings. I just tried to look up anything about the past month and I genuinely cannot find anything. Nothing about it they’re still in jury selection, nothing about any rulings, nothing about the defending attorney or even opinion pieces. Like I know why there’s not much coverage, but nothing at all? Like we got CONSTANT updates about the depp/heard case when it was happening, but now that it’s something about an important issue that would have been the case of the decade in times past, it’s radio silence.

It’s so incredibly disturbing that they’ve filtered it out of the media and that people don’t care enough to demand it be covered. People treated it like a trend and aesthetified it to the point that an actual act of resistance means nothing now.

Also there’s like no concrete evidence in this case. It’s all circumstantial. I feel that everyone forgot that, and because of it, the idea that “innocent until proven guilty” as a precedent is very much in the process of being undermined

Edit: Putting this here again because I keep getting people misinterpreting what I’m trying to say: You guys, I know there’s nothing new to report on. What I’m saying is that when something like this happens, everyone talks about it. Every talk show and opinion columnist and political analyst will talk give speculation and reaction and opinion on it. Like when columbine happened, every news outlet talked about it for months before the trial ever happened. It happened in 99 and the rulings didn’t come out til 01 or something. And even if they never directly mentioned columbine, they would talk about gun violence and bullying and how police weren’t trained for situations like that. They talked about the surrounding issues. Like yeah there’s nothing new that the media has access to rn, but no one is making opinion pieces about the judges conflict of interest, no talk show is having a 20 min segment about gun violence or the state of healthcare. Twenty years ago, it would have stayed in the news cycle at least passively until the case moved forward. But now it’s been phased out almost completely. And I know coverage will pick up when the trial starts. I know courts move slowly. I’m not trying to push conspiracy. I was simply making an observation that it was strange that there was almost no talk about it, that it’s been phased out of news cycles, and how there’s no widespread conversation about the issues surrounding the shooting.

Also, I only used depp/heard in the original because it was the most recent case I could think of. And because I was tired and thought this post would be seen by like 20 people max, so I didn’t bother wording it as precisely as I could have. Columbine and the OJ Simpson case are better examples to work off of.

I just wanted to clarify what I meant so I stop getting comments that misinterpret what I’m trying to say and people being rude about it