Search
1000 results for “lydiaconwell”
-
-
LOL!
I just had to share this obviously AI-written article about animals with chins!
Apparently chin bones are unique to humans. But this article claims there are many charming animals with chins!
I'm sharing an archived copy because I don't want any traffic going to garbage sites.
highlights include:
"Charming dogs, cats, rabbits, and even raccoons get their place on this list of adorable animals with chins."
"A chimp’s chin is not as pronounced as a human‘s, but it does protrude slightly and is hairless." -- written below a photo of a chimp with a clearly hairy chin.
"All pangolins have chins, which help them dig for food."
-
LOL!
I just had to share this obviously AI-written article about animals with chins!
Apparently chin bones are unique to humans. But this article claims there are many charming animals with chins!
I'm sharing an archived copy because I don't want any traffic going to garbage sites.
highlights include:
"Charming dogs, cats, rabbits, and even raccoons get their place on this list of adorable animals with chins."
"A chimp’s chin is not as pronounced as a human‘s, but it does protrude slightly and is hairless." -- written below a photo of a chimp with a clearly hairy chin.
"All pangolins have chins, which help them dig for food."
-
LOL!
I just had to share this obviously AI-written article about animals with chins!
Apparently chin bones are unique to humans. But this article claims there are many charming animals with chins!
I'm sharing an archived copy because I don't want any traffic going to garbage sites.
highlights include:
"Charming dogs, cats, rabbits, and even raccoons get their place on this list of adorable animals with chins."
"A chimp’s chin is not as pronounced as a human‘s, but it does protrude slightly and is hairless." -- written below a photo of a chimp with a clearly hairy chin.
"All pangolins have chins, which help them dig for food."
-
LOL!
I just had to share this obviously AI-written article about animals with chins!
Apparently chin bones are unique to humans. But this article claims there are many charming animals with chins!
I'm sharing an archived copy because I don't want any traffic going to garbage sites.
highlights include:
"Charming dogs, cats, rabbits, and even raccoons get their place on this list of adorable animals with chins."
"A chimp’s chin is not as pronounced as a human‘s, but it does protrude slightly and is hairless." -- written below a photo of a chimp with a clearly hairy chin.
"All pangolins have chins, which help them dig for food."
-
LOL!
I just had to share this obviously AI-written article about animals with chins!
Apparently chin bones are unique to humans. But this article claims there are many charming animals with chins!
I'm sharing an archived copy because I don't want any traffic going to garbage sites.
highlights include:
"Charming dogs, cats, rabbits, and even raccoons get their place on this list of adorable animals with chins."
"A chimp’s chin is not as pronounced as a human‘s, but it does protrude slightly and is hairless." -- written below a photo of a chimp with a clearly hairy chin.
"All pangolins have chins, which help them dig for food."
-
It's the year of the fire hose.
The year of the #FederatedTimeline
-
Young Stephen Fry is on the telly (talking to Kenneth Williams) and he's a bit of a nob.
He became sort of less of a nob later on in life, but also, kind of more of a nob as well.
-
There's a programme on the telly and the narrator was explaining how Chinese alligators were hunted until near extinction because they were thought of as fish-eating pests.
And then there was a man who looked like he was fishing for an alligator but he was actually just feeding one and looking after them.
-
There's a programme on the telly and the narrator was explaining how Chinese alligators were hunted until near extinction because they were thought of as fish-eating pests.
And then there was a man who looked like he was fishing for an alligator but he was actually just feeding one and looking after them.
-
There's a programme on the telly and the narrator was explaining how Chinese alligators were hunted until near extinction because they were thought of as fish-eating pests.
And then there was a man who looked like he was fishing for an alligator but he was actually just feeding one and looking after them.
-
There's a programme on the telly and the narrator was explaining how Chinese alligators were hunted until near extinction because they were thought of as fish-eating pests.
And then there was a man who looked like he was fishing for an alligator but he was actually just feeding one and looking after them.
-
There's a programme on the telly and the narrator was explaining how Chinese alligators were hunted until near extinction because they were thought of as fish-eating pests.
And then there was a man who looked like he was fishing for an alligator but he was actually just feeding one and looking after them.
-
As far as I can tell, according to that mastodon dot social guy, the word 'Toot' is official over for Mastodon posts.
That may be so (my instance still has a Toot button) but I propose the term Subtoot remain.
-
re. #Chomsky
I think something that could explain the split-personality thing is how corporations/ establishments offer privilege and money to those who take their side, with the threat of losing the wealth and privilege if you meaningfully dissent.
There is the concept of loss aversion, where people over weight the value of a loss and under weigh the value of a win.
And then there is straight forward looking out for oneself, making sure you and your family have enough.
I've often considered this when thinking about how so many politicians are supportive of the war crimes and genocide of the West and Israel.
Israel has long been treating politicians to free holidays and money rewards.
I think what I'm saying is:
No matter what your political beliefs are, if say, an oil giant or an Israeli company offered you £70K or even just £10k, would you accept it?
Someone famous might refuse it because their principals are worth more. But other people, ordinary people? How many would turn down a lot of money because of their principals?
Because by refusing, will you profit in other ways? Maybe your conscience might profit, but your conscience won't feed your kids or give you something to retire on.
Basically, I think there is something in the human psyche to explain this. Something to explore.
-
#JustinPodur | After Noam
I didn't fully read this post but what's interesting is that it does the same thing that other Chomsky fans have done: They split up Chomsky's personality and compartmentalise the different parts.
I think someone should do a little critique of this seeming trend. Because it's not necessarily used for, say, Trump, or Andrew Mountbatten.
At least not on the left. I've not seen people talking about the two sides of Andrew Mountbatten.
I get Chomsky was influential but I struggle with the two-personas thing because it feels like an attempt to excuse poor behaviour.
I think humans do have different sides to them, sometimes contradictory, and I think the different sides of Chomsky are quite interesting because they appear to be polar opposites.
But I don't understand people's trouble accepting Chomsky's friendship with Epstein.
Still, the article is good because it lists some of Chomsky's strengths and political influences.
-
-
#CraigMurray reckons the High Court ruling for Palestine Action is deliberately designed to fail at appeal.
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2026/02/postpone-the-celebrations/
-
Nice going, boys. You're playing yesterday's tape.
-
This is interesting because there is something distinctly off about putting the statue of the real life of Joe Frazier at the bottom of the Philadelphia museum steps, while moving the statue of the fictional Rocky at the top.
But I think you have to bear in mind that the entire connection with those steps and boxing comes 100% from the movie Rocky.
So it makes sense that the statue at the top is of Rocky.
It's just a poor judgement to put a real life black boxing underneath a fictional one.
You could have Joe Frazier at the top, however. It would reference to both Rocky and real life boxing, and that could be quite clever.
But yeah, I get that Rocky should be at the top.
As a side note, one of my favourite parts of the movie is when Apollo Creed yells 'Joe Frazier!'
-
This is #GeorgeGalloway speaking to #ChrisHedges but it's very good:
Trump is mentioned 38,000 times in the Epstein Files
-
This is #GeorgeGalloway speaking to #ChrisHedges but it's very good:
Trump is mentioned 38,000 times in the Epstein Files
-
This is #GeorgeGalloway speaking to #ChrisHedges but it's very good:
Trump is mentioned 38,000 times in the Epstein Files
-
This is #GeorgeGalloway speaking to #ChrisHedges but it's very good:
Trump is mentioned 38,000 times in the Epstein Files
-
This is #GeorgeGalloway speaking to #ChrisHedges but it's very good:
Trump is mentioned 38,000 times in the Epstein Files
-
idk There's a couple of articles about #Chomsky going around, about a duality, a two-sidedness about him ...
But I can't help read them thinking the authors are performing a little mental gymnastics to avoid saying the obvious:
that he was a fraud and a manipulator who fooled a lot of people who called him a friend.
I don't know Chomsky's political work all that well, and I know he has had a lot of influence, particularly with Western #Propaganda.
But I think the notion of him deceiving the left, being a manipulator and a fraudulent activist is perhaps something people should be taking more seriously. Because it would point to the ineffectiveness of activism, and how the left might have been steered into ineffective activism, and how the likes of Chomsky helped to endorse that ineffectiveness.(Note that Chomsky didn't support #BDS)
I think that might be a more fruitful area of consideration rather than trying to split his activism from his personal life.
-
#JonathanCook | Ch4 doc shows Starmer's ban on Palestine Action was done to protect the arms industry
"But I want to add a point of criticism, in particular, about one scene from the first half. An interview with Huda Ammori, Palestine Action’s co-founder, included a truly cringe-inducing request that she condemn Hamas over its October 7 2023 attack.
We should have long moved past the point where Palestinians – more than two years into a genocide of their people – are expected to make such ritual denunciations before they can be heard.
If that isn't obvious, consider another interview during the programme – this one with Gideon Falter, the head of the Campaign Against Antisemitism. The CAA is a virulently pro-Israel organisation that was recently excoriated by a judge for repeatedly misleading him – lying – in an antisemitism case it brought before the court.
Why did the programme makers not ask Falter, who actually is an apologist for Israeli violence, whether he would condemn Israel for its two-year slaughter of children in Gaza? Presumably they shied away from that confrontation because it would have suggested that they were holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the Israeli government."
-
#JonathanCook | Ch4 doc shows Starmer's ban on Palestine Action was done to protect the arms industry
"But I want to add a point of criticism, in particular, about one scene from the first half. An interview with Huda Ammori, Palestine Action’s co-founder, included a truly cringe-inducing request that she condemn Hamas over its October 7 2023 attack.
We should have long moved past the point where Palestinians – more than two years into a genocide of their people – are expected to make such ritual denunciations before they can be heard.
If that isn't obvious, consider another interview during the programme – this one with Gideon Falter, the head of the Campaign Against Antisemitism. The CAA is a virulently pro-Israel organisation that was recently excoriated by a judge for repeatedly misleading him – lying – in an antisemitism case it brought before the court.
Why did the programme makers not ask Falter, who actually is an apologist for Israeli violence, whether he would condemn Israel for its two-year slaughter of children in Gaza? Presumably they shied away from that confrontation because it would have suggested that they were holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the Israeli government."
-
#JonathanCook | Ch4 doc shows Starmer's ban on Palestine Action was done to protect the arms industry
"But I want to add a point of criticism, in particular, about one scene from the first half. An interview with Huda Ammori, Palestine Action’s co-founder, included a truly cringe-inducing request that she condemn Hamas over its October 7 2023 attack.
We should have long moved past the point where Palestinians – more than two years into a genocide of their people – are expected to make such ritual denunciations before they can be heard.
If that isn't obvious, consider another interview during the programme – this one with Gideon Falter, the head of the Campaign Against Antisemitism. The CAA is a virulently pro-Israel organisation that was recently excoriated by a judge for repeatedly misleading him – lying – in an antisemitism case it brought before the court.
Why did the programme makers not ask Falter, who actually is an apologist for Israeli violence, whether he would condemn Israel for its two-year slaughter of children in Gaza? Presumably they shied away from that confrontation because it would have suggested that they were holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the Israeli government."
-
#JonathanCook | Ch4 doc shows Starmer's ban on Palestine Action was done to protect the arms industry
"But I want to add a point of criticism, in particular, about one scene from the first half. An interview with Huda Ammori, Palestine Action’s co-founder, included a truly cringe-inducing request that she condemn Hamas over its October 7 2023 attack.
We should have long moved past the point where Palestinians – more than two years into a genocide of their people – are expected to make such ritual denunciations before they can be heard.
If that isn't obvious, consider another interview during the programme – this one with Gideon Falter, the head of the Campaign Against Antisemitism. The CAA is a virulently pro-Israel organisation that was recently excoriated by a judge for repeatedly misleading him – lying – in an antisemitism case it brought before the court.
Why did the programme makers not ask Falter, who actually is an apologist for Israeli violence, whether he would condemn Israel for its two-year slaughter of children in Gaza? Presumably they shied away from that confrontation because it would have suggested that they were holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of the Israeli government."