God(&gods)( in the material world, but also) in the world of Idea(l)s(, and probably other worlds inaccessible to humans as well) :

SABC News as well(, not western channels though) : https://youtube.com/@sabcdigitalnews?si=NJVpLshupTA-SkI-

The u.s.a. was already condemned in the case of Nicaragua and nothing changed and nobody knows that, in the very improbable offchance that Israel was condemned, they would just act like Russia when the International Court of Justice ordered them to leave Ukraine.
Let's say that our medias talk about this improbable success and, even more improbable, support the ICJ and condemn Israel, everyone would just forget a month later. Sure, there's nothing to lose by trying, but not much to gain either, it's not the beginning of an effective solution, it'll be the exact same shit as before.
And the ICJ wouldn't even need to be considered the bad guy, the contradiction wouldn't raise an eyebrow, but let's say i'm wrong, have an hope in this if you want.

edit : That's an exaggeration, those who hate Israel won't forget such judgment and would remind us when they got the chance, that's the difference i'm seeing, so you're right to say that it's not nothing to be able to label them officially as genocidal, it'd add a new argument/insult of choice.

That's ~two every three years :

Somalia needs some support with Somaliland, and https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Biden-Approves-Redeployment-of-US-Troops-to-Somalia-20220517-0003.html

Jamaica doesn't give any certainty either : https://globalvoices.org/2023/10/30/jamaicans-express-disappointment-over-their-countrys-no-show-un-gaza-vote/

And i don't think Brazil would want to expose themselves as much as South Africa did(, nor China for that matter), more to lose than to gain, that's justice. Bolivia probably only supported the case because Luis Arce has forbidden Evo Morales from being reelected and is trying to show that ~'he's not a traitor to the movement' despite that.
Let's say that they have a chance if you want though, it doesn't matter because that's not what would make a change, do they only have the option of a full-scale war with unknown consequences to do what's right ? We're just supposed to watch and then it'll be as if nothing ever happened, ok.

Yeah, a buzzword with legal implications, Myanmar's rebels are terrorists, good for them.

Videos of his arrival, and official venezuelan statement.

Arrested in Cap Verde the 12th June 2020, he was held in Miami since 2021 under the pretense of money laundering, Interpol notifications or arrest warrants were issued retroactively and, of course, diplomatic immunity wasn't respected. Here :

And usual accusations of mistreatments.

In order to obtain his liberation, they had to : release 10 americans, extradite fugitive Leonard Glenn Francis, and release around 20 political prisoners from jail. (source), it's as asymmetric as usual.

What's less known is that apparently Qatar played once again a role of mediation :

The wiki page lacks a lot of the above information, but this extract is ~interesting, they're seriously claiming that hungry people are easier to control and less prone to revolts, so they're sanctioning the c.l.a.p. which was feeding the poorest of them :

I still think that evilness is a myth formulated by people refusing to understand/explain, and i'll continue to think so even if we(sterners) exist.
As an example, the murderous Israel would indeed be safer by destroying Palestine once and for all, at least as long as their estimation of a lack of retaliation from their neighbours proves to be correct.

Massive defundings and privatizations in sight...

And :

And b.t.w., contrary to what is often said, the huge i.m.f. debt(, with an 8.07% interest rate, more than others,) is the responsability of the right, as usual :


more here

The title isn't exact :

Moreover, their relations were only re-instaured after the western-supported coup by J.Añez :

(Here's Colombia's president 6 hours ago b.t.w., among other examples)

(no need to point out that it would be safer for them not to take position for//against any side. The article also spoke of Argentina, here's an interesting 2mn-long point of view)

Permanently Deleted

They claim to fight disinformation yet speak about a "technical glitch", classic, just like cops lying on their depositions, what a way to set an example.

Unless the creatures, overall, would prefer to have never existed in the first place, then the Creator isn't evil and should be praised(, that's only one reason, for example an other one would be our search for Absolute/Greatness/Good/..)

And they've long gone past the retaliation of "an eye for an eye"

The worst is that we're still not offering a solution for this decades-old conflict, there must be a way to please both sides ! That's what our medias should talk about instead of always act as a powerless spectator or judge, where is the list of solutions, why don't we all know about the different possibilities ? Our actions only aim for the prolongation of the best outcome for us and the worst outcome for them, that's not fair and they have every right to hate us for this injustice. Once again, how to resolve permanently&virtuously this conflict should be the main topic 'on our televisions'/'in our newspapers', so that our leaders make the right/just/correct decision.

And an other word that they would refuse to attribute to fighters from our side, but would hate you if you refuse to use it for the fighters of the other side :

And weird.

People are saying that referendums represent the will of the people, as if it was unmoving. How many people would have changed their minds after the u.s.s.r. dissolution of 1991 for example ?

Also, i've looked at the opinion surveys for presidential elections of the last decades and it always moved a lot in the last weeks, a proof that they're consciously manipulative/lying i.m.h.o.

From https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Australian_Indigenous_Voice_referendum#Advertising_and_media :
Mass media in Australia are highly concentrated, with Rupert Murdoch's News Corp Australia dominating the landscape, owning over two-thirds of leading newspapers along with most online news websites ; three News Corp outlets occupy the top three positions in the nation, based on popularity and viewership.
The majority of News Corp's content was commentary, not reporting, so when the various articles and videos were examined together, around 70% of the coverage favoured "No" arguments.

Yeah, it's just a resolution, the list of countries was what interested me, always the same opponents(, since we're also the main countries behind such measures).

I take it as a natural reaction to overload of stress/emotion/pain. Being able to cry is physiologically beneficial (you get rid of cortisol) and psychologically it can help you process the things you're going through more quickly. Trying to appear though by not crying seems counterproductive to me, but I understand in some cultures it is not socially acceptable to cry, especially for men.

To me, if you're crying you're admitting that something is stronger than you, that you're powerless, and i still find it useless, i guess that i just have a bad image of it(, it can be beautiful though, like tears of joy, or of an emotion which isn't defeat). But i clearly(, and subconsciously,) don't treat men, women, or children, in the same point of view in regard to crying, i'd never think of saying "man up" to a woman hurt to the point of tears, yet i find it admirable when a man swallow his pain, and straighten his profile in order to act after whatever happened, that's the common thinking, i'm not the weird one here(, even if my descriptions are very imperfect), but since modernity changed so many things they may end up suppressing the differences between men and women, or not, w/e.

If I suppressed my emotions, I would still be influenced by them, but I would have no conscious control over them, which would again result in limiting my rationality

On the contrary, suppressing your emotions helps to act rationally without being overwhelmed by them, and i.m.o. there's no real difference between emotions and reason, since our feelings can be explained rationally, we're often saying that "reason ignore the heart's own reasons", but that's not true, we are indeed influenced by subconscious feelings that we would be unable to analyse, but that's a minor side and i don't make a distinction between the cold reasoning and the hot emotions, i'm deciding with both a'd i think almost everyone does the same.

I find the terms inner strength and beauty to be also very vague.

100%, i realized it when i was writing the examples, and the example you gave me is another very good one, you can indeed find effeminate/weak persons who are "tough motherf*ckers", i didn't give enough thought behind what "internally strong" may mean, and it also depends on the situation, it's not because you're weak or ugly internally at one time of the time that you can't act beautifully or strongly at another time.

I agree with you that it's reductive to stop on two adjectives.

Well, it doesn't come from me and i have a story and some good memories from it. But in a few words, i asked someone special(, ~9 years ago,) if he had a motto, and he told me that the masonic triangle is "Strength · Beauty · Wisdom", i still haven't checked if it's true(, but discovered a few years later that it's in the Kabbalah). It stayed in my mind and i naturally decided to apply it to men and women and divide it in internally//externally. Just to say that somewhere.
While reductive, i think it has a lot of truth in it.

I don't see any reason to propagate just one way for men and one way for women.

Men have testosterone, have sexual fantasy when they touch women, and read comics when they imagine themselves fighting.
Women have estrogens, in their fantasy they imagine themselves being touched, and read romantic novels when they're preparing themselves for the unavoidable desire they'll attract.

Yeah, i'll need to edit this message, if you're reading this line give me 30-40mn i want to do something first.

Not that i care but i'm sure that your comment made sense in your mind, would you mind sharing it with me ?

Do you interpret relieving your emotions by crying as being weak ?

Yeah, obviously, would you say that it's a sign of strength ?

Or perhaps feeling emotions as being weak ?

"Emotion" is a vague term. Some emotions like bravery(, often a borderline foolishness,) are assimilated with strength. Some emotions like the feeling of defeat, self-pity, the lack of resilience, the fear of authority/punishment that makes you betray others/ideals, that's weak. Always interesting to see how Chelsea Manning is stronger than a lot of men in this regard. Men love to fight, so kinda appreciate to be hurt in a way, and are proud of their scars.
Some emotions are beautiful, such as the one expressed in poetry, others are ugly and you don't need examples to get what i mean.

It's easier to exclude men from external beauty and women from external strength than it is to exclude them from internal beauty and strength, respectively.

And do you find women more flawed, because they're physically weaker than men ?

We have our qualities and flaws, some women are stronger than some men and some men are more beautiful( inside&outside) than women, and it's reductive to stop at these two adjectives, as well as obviously erroneous to draw conclusion on an individual from generalities.
Here's what i answered to a previous comment if you're interested :
Admittedly, beauty is more useful in times of peace than strength, if i count the benefits(, women can give birth and that's the most important thing in Nature), women have more of them than men, but if we can keep some of our qualities i won't say no.

Why would it be better if there were no distinction between men and women ? Or between countries, or citizens ?
What's the use of showing your vulnerability, is that something that others like to see ? And it's not difficult, what's difficult is to take upon yourself and desire the struggle.
We're men, alike rocks, people/life hit us and we don't move, this has advantages and inconvenients, we generally appreciate women's sensibility, and i suppose that most of them appreciate to be able to rely on men when they're needed.
Admittedly, beauty is more useful in times of peace than strength, if i count the benefits(, women can give birth and that's the most important thing in Nature), women have more of them than men, but if we can keep some of our qualities i won't say 'no'.