Alyx Hinata 🇹🇩🚫💀 @alyx@gameliberty.club

@j Yeah, if by 14 you don't understand that injecting yourself with random substances is a bad idea (especially not sterilized ones).... Survival of the fittest.

@j I was thinking the other day about the 2004 Madrid attack. I think that was the first big one on our continent. A huge shock. Panic everywhere.
But now it feels like western Europe is getting similar scale of harm every month or so, and nobody bats an eye. Well, nobody in charge anyway.

@j Boring. He's arguing about the things I honestly care the least about.
I'm interested first and foremost in keeping this ideology away from easily confused children and young adults, who get tricked into thinking their cure for unhappiness or depression is at the bottom of a particularly dangerous pill bottle. Becoming an alcoholic probably has less dangerous side effects than transitioning.

@j @bajax @Humpleupagus @p @TeaTootler @lanodan @Noraweed

I can only play CED vinyl discs.

Jokes aside, my browser (Vivaldi) plays only the AV1 one.

@grey I believe you have to be blood related to Timmy to be granted the privilege of wearing the beanie. So his kid will definitely wear one.

@VD15 The least he could do is actually commit to the bit, and use real makeup.

Just discovered that Tim Pool sponsored a Nascar car... what is this world we live in?!

@maxmustermann
Such compassion, much tolerance. wow

@j
>This can't be real..
You should have known that this absolutely can be real :P

"Did you see Trump's lap in Daytona 500"
That is not a sentence I ever expected to hear. Are we sure we didn't transition into the Fallout universe at some point?

@j I'm disappointed in you. I thought you of all people would be aware of what these people can be capable of.

@PinochetsCommieCopter
If your church wants women ministers that's fine. It's still weird considering... well... the whole of Christianity. But whatever.
What I don't get is... why the fake beard?! I feel like the Christian God had something to say about lying.

The number of Americans who have a poorer understanding of the English languages than a random foreigner is hilarious sometimes.

Yes, this post was made specifically for you, to test if you're a stalker.

@SuperSnekFriend
>Reiterating speculation is not an argument.
And you're also speculating. You don't KNOW what happened. You have a short description of some events that you interpreted in one way, and I provided another way it can be interpreted in. Neither of us know. Can you even comprehend that I'm not trying to argue against your interpretation? I already presented my argument, that being that a dog is gonna bite you if you subject it to that kind of pain. My latest post was trying to clarify what I felt was a misunderstanding you had regarding how I envisioned my scenario took place.

>The burden of proof is on you
No, I have reasonable doubt. The burden is on you if you insist the word was used this way or that way.

>You don't know me
>I was formally trained in English and in Biblical theology
>Biblical theology
Ha. I find it hilarious that you think that is something to be proud of. Not that I particularly believe it anyway. Rule #1: don't trust random strangers on the internet. Especially ones that are prone to being hostile.

Unless you want to spiral down further into attacks and personal insults, I don't see a point into continuing this.
Maybe I'm reading you wrong, but it seems to me that you feel personally offended that someone sees a different scenario in those words than you do, and I can't comprehend why. It's not even like it paints Lincoln in that much better of a picture. Even if you take the sewing thing out entirely, we're still talking about a pair of brothers that think hunting raccoons for no discernible reason is fun, that clearly disobeyed family orders against it (seeing how they sneaked at night), who gladly handled/played with the freshly skinned hide of an animal, and who were happy that the family dog died. They already come out as really bad kids, with questionable psychology. Why is it so important to you that I agree with you on the sewing bit?

@SuperSnekFriend
>By the way, how does one merely overlap foreign skin on other skin, like a sleeve or sock, by *sewing* the foreign element onto that main skin

I don't think I understand what you're trying to ask here.
I'll try to reiterate my speculation of the best case scenario. Maybe I didn't make myself clear enough.
What I considered as a possibility is that the two essentially fashioned clothing for the dog, directly on the dog, like how a tailor or a seamstress will fashion clothes on a mannequin. They take cut pieces of cloth, lay them over the mannequin, and use pins to tie the pieces of cloth to each other in the places where they will later do the sewing.
Similarly, my scenario is that the two boys essentially used the dog as a mannequin, they wrapped the hide around its neck, or body, and sewed the ends of the hide together tightly against the body so that it wouldn't be able to slip past the legs. Imagine it like tying a belt around the dog's neck, or body.

I'm not accusing anyone of lying. Not Whipple, not the witnesses, and not you. My position is that the wording is not detailed enough for me to be 100% sure of what the act being described is. At the very least I see two possibilities. You want to assume the worst case scenario about Lincoln because you have an already formed bias. That's fine. I'm not saying you shouldn't believe this. I'm not even saying you're wrong. From the start I've considered it a valid possibility. But I don't have your bias, and I'll need more proof before I can interpret this story the same way you are, with the same confidence you have, and accuse him of being a sociopath.

Going back to the word "operation" a bit. I'm sure "stunt" wasn't a word until recently. That's irrelevant. I'm interested in the meaning behind the word, in the meaning of "doing a stupid action that you planned out". And my question is whether "operation" could have been used back then to convey a similar meaning too. As I said, let's be honest here, neither of us are historians. So don't give me the "oh, they wouldn't have thought of that meaning in this context". You don't know. And the context is two children doing very stupid things. The context isn't "performing surgery".

P.S. As an aside, a weird thing I just realized. The story came off to me initially like the kids did the sewing in a spur of the moment thing. But that couldn't be the case, cause I don't think they just happened to carry a sewing kit. This then shows premeditation of the act. Which I think is more consistent with a sociopath's behavior. I'd consider this stronger evidence for your interpretation than the argument regarding the word "operation".

@LukeAlmighty @matrix Is this about it being a reference to how Indian scammers will steal from you via gift cards? Or is it something else?

@beardalaxy I don't know, but I think he has a better chance at doing something worthy of the Nobel peace prize than Obama.