
Except it comes from an actual concern from before boilers were sealed off, it was entirely possible to things like rats to get inside them and die, contaminating the water.

Lmao I'm on the last couple of chapters of it right now and this was my exact thought.

It's asbestos.

It's dropped to where it was on Thursday. We've had 4 bigger drops in the last month and it's still up compared to where it was a month ago.

Weird that they would extend terms but only by 1 year. If you're already giving yourself total power and will presumably keep extending the term limits, why not just remove then entirely? Or at least make it 10 years or something?

The ideal woman

Don't forget things like China blatantly stealing IP fro the west.
And rich Chinese buying up land in western countries.
And rich Chinese students going to universities in the west and then buying/cheating their way through their degree.
And (this might come under your point) destroying domestic industries of western countries by flooding the market with cheap inferior products.

Answer the question tankie, what are you claiming has been made up?

Op is now banned from every community on .ml

Well the term originated in Britain where they weren't that popular at the time, and like the post says it was only if you wore short too much.

Bitch I am a fucking rape victim, and because I am a man and was rated by a woman no one believed me, so kindly shut your fucking mouth.
In that same instance I also had my rapist turn the accusation on me, and had people belive her inherently.
So I know what the fuck I'm talking about I know both sides of this argument. And I'm telling you, as a fuckjng victim, to listen to me.
Assume people are innocent until you have actual evidence they are not (unless the victim is a freind of yours obviously)

Except he was already being published? This is a direct response to the allegations, so it's defacto a punishment.
To continue the analogy, if a kid get a copy of the new Fifa game at Christmas every year, then one year he get into a fight or something and his parent decides not to buy him Fifa anymore as a direct consequence of that, then it is 100% a punishment.
They are taking a disciplinary action against them as a direct consequence of their actions. That's by definition a punishment.

The crime is the non consensual part of it, not the act itself.
I'm not pretending they don't exist, they're just not concrete evidence.
It being public opinion is still not a justification to throw out one of the most basic principles of morality?

He doesn't have the "right" to. But something not being a right doesn't mean denying it isn't a punishment?
Kids don't have the "right" to play video games, but a parent can still punish their child by refusing to let them play them, no?

Refusing to publish someone's work is not a punishment. He doesn't have the right to be published.
Bad argument IMO. Of course that's a punishment. If it was a case of people refusing to publish someone's work for non sexual assault based reasons, we would consider it a punishment.

The proof is that Cosby admitted to it.

Okay but none of that is evidence?
The idea of innocence until proven guilty is a corner stone of modern morality, and one we don't throw out for any other crime.
Do you think we should apply this standard to to every crime, that if we have enough circumstantial evidence we should just assume someone is guilty?

With his feet?

So your argument that because the holocaust was so bad, calling any other genocide a genocide makes you a nazi?
If this want such a serious topic I would dying of laughter.
I think it's selling that you had to dig out a "source" from a completely random person with no credentials posting on a website with no authority on the matter, that also goes against that point and call the genocide in gaza a genocide.
https://jewishcurrents.org/can-genocide-studies-survive-a-genocide-in-gaza
And also points out how many holocaust organisation and researchers DO in fact agree that the holodomor genocide is a genocide.
This logic is so flimsy it's kind of ridiculous. And if you applied to any other heinous crime, you would openly ridiculed. Like imagine telling a woman she was actually a rape apologist for saying her husband raped her when she told him no, but he continued, because she would be comparing it to a case where a woman was violently raped in an ally by a stranger to the point she died.
Or telling modern victims of slavery that they're actually just as bad as slavers because they tacitly compare themselves to victims of the African slave trade.
Just because the holocaust is the worst genocide in our history, does mean that there are no other genocides ever. Using the brutality of the holocaust to deny other genocides still just makes you a genocide denier. And also a piece of shit using the horrible deaths of millions of people to try and scapegoat the genocidal maniac you desperately want to shield from all criticism like a demented weirdo.
And even IF we take your source as gospel, it still acknowledges holodomor was a terrible atrocity. And you denying it happened is still just as morally reprehensible, even if we don't call it a genocide.

You keep making this accusation, but are apparently incapable of actually telling me what has been said that is "Nazi propaganda"
And calling someone a "holocaust denier" for non existent reasons is completely meaningless when you yourself deny multiple genocides.
And yeah it's not a discussion. It's me talking to myself while some angry loser shouts random insults in a desperate attempt to make themselves feel morally superior to random on the internet.