unicorn

Had Israel occupied Gaza, the current situation would not have taken place.

I feel a song coming on...

Protesters blocked a major freeway into downtown Los Angeles during the morning commute today. Many trapped people included young schoolchildren (including quite a few whose first meal of the day was supposed to be at the school), and at least one man interviewed who said he was on his way to his dying father's hospital bed. A similar protest recently blocked the bridge linking Oakland to San Francisco. Regardless of whether you agree with the protesters on this particular issue, has such a protest ever swayed you to view protesters' issue more favorably? I would think it would have the opposite effect. For example, if I were the President and about to meet the Israeli ambassador about negotiating a cease-fire, I would announce that due to the protest, I would delay the meeting by 24 hours, and if there were any similar harassing tactics, I would double the delay each time. For me, causing the suffering of innocent children and other civilians is almost a form of terrorism in and of itself.

In posting an article such as this, it would be nice to have more background as to what she posted. Otherwise, no way to form an opinion.

While there are a few unaffiliated members of Congress, a 3rd party candidate can only act as a spoiler in Presidential elections because of the electoral college system. This very famously happened in the 2000 election, in which the spoiled asshole Ralph Nader handed Bush, Jr. the presidency. Although Gore won more votes than Bush Jr. in the popular vote, in Florida Bush Jr. garnered 537 more votes than Gore, and that was enough to tip the electoral college vote. Since Nader received almost 100,000 votes in Florida, there is no question but that he handed the election to Bush, Jr., which has had serious repercussions for this country and the world in general. A 3rd party candidate could certainly be decisive in the upcoming election as well. Of course, much will depend on whether Trump can be criminally convicted before the election, but Trump's team is shotgunning so many objections/appeals, that he may well be able to delay such a conviction. Although I suspect a majority of Americans share my horror over Trump, who's an obvious professional shyster, Biden is a weak candidate, and a 3rd party candidacy could stop any chance he has to defeat Trump (such as Kennedy's planned run). Even a small number of votes in swing states (Florida, Ohio, Virginia, etc.) would doom Biden. Of course, a run by a Republican could spell big trouble for Trump, but the Republican candidates (other than Trump) have all pledged to support the eventual nominee.

When I walked my dog into the park today, I noticed a car going into the parking lot with a menorah on the hood of the car with the words "Happy Hanukkah" in big letters. Given all of the hostilities and crazy people around, that seemed rather foolhardy to me. I mean, most people can recognize that just because one in Jewish doesn't mean one is a supporter of Netanyahu, and just because one is Muslim or Arab or even Palestinian doesn't mean one is a supporter of Hamas. That being said, it just takes one nutcase to get into a powder-keg situation. It reminded me of those Palestinian students in New Hampshire who got attacked while wearing Palestinian head wraps. Yes, in an ideal world, it shouldn't be a problem. But don't people understand that it only takes one nut-case for disaster to strike? Of course, the Palestinian students should have been able to wear what they wanted without getting attacked. But was it wise to put themselves out there? Or are these people trying to pick a fight? Wouldn't you think this is a time to lay low? We're going to Qatar next month, and will leave our rainbow flags at home, thank you.

Well, not quite. Of the original 13 states, only one wasn't on the coast (Pennsylvania), and it was a larger one. In the 18th Century, the idea of electing a national leader by votes of the common citizen was novel, and that's why the founding fathers came up with the electoral college. Now, the system is easily recognized as horrible in many ways, but getting rid of it would require majorities of both parties, so such a Constitutional amendment is unlikely to pass--it gives less powerful parties the opportunity to game the system.

Assuming you've been vaccinated for diphtheria, the only bacterial infections which affect the throat, generally, are strep and gonorrhea (staph can cause an abscess, but that would be obvious), and none of those cause a cough. I'd be curious as to what the other medications were. Viral infections usually turn the corner after 10 days, so it could be just a coincidence. If one of those medications was prednisone, that could really have made a difference, especially if there's a history of asthma. Hopefully you were tested for gonorrhea (though, again, that won't cause a cough). The antibiotic may have been helpful if a sinus infection developed and was the cause. Normally, a sinus infection will cause site-specific pain under either eye, behind the nose, or near the center of either side of the forehead. Since it doesn't appear as if a specific diagnosis was made, it would probably be prudent to recheck the hsCRP and CBC to make sure the numbers normalize when this is over. Although quite unlikely, you want to make sure something weird isn't going on (for example, leukemia, or tuberculosis). If one of the medications was prednisone, do not recheck the CBC/hsCRP until at least a week after you finish the prednisone.

We never got any feedback from the OP as to how things ended up. Perhaps we can get an update?

Upper respiratory infections are caused by viruses, so won't benefit from antibiotics. In fact, outcomes are worse for those treated with antibiotics. Amoxicillin is mainly helpful only for dental infections or strep throats. In the case of URI's, if one is at risk, it may be helpful to test for Covid and take Paxlovid (if done promptly). Otherwise, with URI's, one just has to treat the symptoms. It's not at all uncommon for URI symptoms to last 10 days.

Another clarification: freedom of speech doesn't quite mean the government can't prohibit ANY speech. Prohibited speech includes defamation/slander, threats, fraud, and perjury.

Is that more or less than the number of journalists Putin has murdered?

I agree completely. What I'll never understand is who would ever want to work for Trump. Everyone has got to know that all Trump will do is make the people who work for him try to cover up his mistakes, then get thrown under the bus when they get caught. Surely people have to know Trump will always be the sleaze who will turn on anyone who even helps him. I have no sympathy for the Michael Cohens of the world. MC knew he was dealing with a fraudster and a liar. No boo-hoos when he finds himself in prison, having been even stiffed for his legal bills. Anyone who associates with and assists someone as morally bereft as Trump obviously is should not be surprised when the inevitable happens to him.

Also: Gal. 3:23-25 "However, before the faith arrived, we were being guarded under law, being handed over into custody, looking to the faith that was about to be revealed. 24 So the Law became our guardian leading to Christ, so that we might be declared righteous through faith. 25 But now that the faith has arrived, we are no longer under a guardian."

Well, even Paul himself said (Romans 7:6) "But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter." The New Testament clearly teaches that Christians do not have to follow the old laws of Leviticus. If you read Leviticus, it is absolutely chock-full of laws/edicts that Christians don't follow, so it's a bit crazy to pick one out and say "but you have to follow this one." Not everyone agrees with the translation/interpretation that Paul condemned homosexuality. If he did, though, he was the only apostle to do so, and Jesus Himself certainly did not.

Well, I haven't looked at all of the cases, but in these two defenestration cases, they were obviously not suicide--and it's been made very clear they weren't. No one checks into a hospital to commit suicide by jumping out of a window, for one, and the turning off of the security cameras was the other huge clue that the FSB was responsible. The other (journalist) case is even more clear-cut. Obviously, no one goes grocery shopping, then throws his groceries in the stairway, takes off his shoes, pulls up his sweater and jacket above his shoulders, then crashes through a window in his apartment. Any one of those factors rules out a suicide. The refusal of emergency services to intervene was the icing on the cake. The whole point is that Putin wants to make it as clear as possible that these are NOT suicides. He wants everyone to get the message: if you have the public's ear and you speak against me, I will kill you and laugh in your face about it. The goal is to make it quite obvious that these are not suicides, but will be labeled as such. I'm sure Putin gets a good chuckle after all of these deaths.

Ridiculous. Putin intentionally makes it very obvious to everyone that he's the one responsible. I suppose that organized criminal elements can commit murders, but clearly only the FSB, with Putin's instructions, can make the hospital turn off its video cameras at the opportune moment (and stop any investigations into the death). Putin wants everyone to know that those speak against him will be violently killed, with impunity. He also made it very clear that he was responsible for the murder of journalist Ivan Safronov when he had his goons similarly throw him out of a 5th floor window. The fact that Safronov had just returned from the grocery store, that there were groceries and personal effects strewn about the stairway--and that he had his shoes removed and jacket/sweater pulled over his shoulders--made it clear to everyone that the official explanation of suicide couldn't possibly be true. Of course, authorities refused to send an ambulance until after he'd been confirmed dead (he was still alive for 30 minutes after the fall, but the request for an ambulance was denied). Again, only the FSB could have made it clear to emergency services that they couldn't intervene.

He was the Chairman of Lukoil, like the website says. Jesus Christ, you're like the George Santos of this forum. When you caught in a lie, rather than fess up, you just double-down with another, even more outrageous lie. Believe me, it does not make you look clever. It makes you look like a clown. Maganov was a critic of Putin. Putin can't take any criticism, so the barbarous pussy that Putin is had him murdered.

There are long lists of these people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspicious_deaths_of_Russian_businesspeople_(2022–2023) "...Ravil Maganov, chairman of the national oil company Lukoil, fell from a Kremlin Hospital window under suspicious circumstances, according to reports: CCTV cameras had been "turned off for repairs", Putin was visiting the hospital the same day, and associates did not believe he was suicidal...". Whether or not you personally witnessed this event is dumb and irrelevant. Do not continue to make a fool of yourself by denying what is documented and common knowledge. You continue to intentionally make false statements of fact, which are easily disproven, and this only makes you come off as a liar. And your continued arrogant refusal to use google translate doesn't make you look any wiser (though at least this time I understood what you were trying to say).

You missed the point. What Jesus said is in the New Testament and therefore supersedes the Old Testament. It is in the New Testament that Jesus said (I believe in the book of Matthew, among other places, though I'm not at home right now so don't have access to my Bible) that those who follow Him don't have to adhere to the edicts of the Old Testament, such as those of Leviticus. This is why most Christian men eat pork and shrimp, aren't circumcised (except in the US), wear clothing with blended fabrics, and so on.

While some Jews do follow the laws in Leviticus, one of the main points of Christianity is that a Christian does not have to follow those laws, so there is no need to desecrate those Bibles. Doing so just shows that that person doesn't understand Christianity. Christians are allowed to wear cotton-polyester and other blended fabrics, eat pork and/or shrimp/shellfish, not circumcise their boys, and sleep with people of the same gender. That's why it's called the New Testament.

Christianity was not always anti-gay. The late Yale Professor John Boswell noted that anti-gay interpretations started around the 12th Century: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Boswell "...Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality (1980) is a work which, according to George Chauncey et al. (1989), "offered a revolutionary interpretation of the Western tradition, arguing that the Roman Catholic Church had not condemned gay people throughout its history, but rather, at least until the twelfth century, had alternately evinced no special concern about homosexuality or actually celebrated love between men."..." Besides, the religion is called Christianity, not Paulism. No one has ever claimed that Jesus said anything against homosexuality. Quite the contrary, Jesus is purported to have freed Christians from having to follow the dictums of the book of Leviticus. Those who froth anti-gay vitriol, probably often gay themselves, are simply engaging in the time-honored tradition of scapegoating to distract from real problems. Yes, Paul's words have probably been mistranslated. At best they're ambiguous. That being said, those who follow the Christian faith should be following the teachings of Jesus.

My Russian is terrible. However, at least I understand that, and use assistance when I need to. It's far better than overestimating my abilities and appearing like a jackass. Мой русский ужасен. Однако, по крайней мере, я это понимаю и прибегаю к помощи, когда это необходимо. Это гораздо лучше, чем переоценивать свои способности и выглядеть придурком.

Your English is incomprehensible. Since you can't write in decent English, for crying out loud, just type in what you need translated into google translate. It won't cost you one kopek. Ваш английский непонятен. Поскольку вы не умеете писать на приличном английском, для того, чтобы кричать вслух, просто введите то, что вам нужно, в переводе на Google Translate. Это не будет стоить вам ни копейки.