whereisk

Rapist says what??

How could the answer be yes when they’re supporting a person that deliberately incited political violence on Jan 6? And celebrated violence when it happened against political opponents or adjacents?

This is like naming files “final”, there’s “final final” and “final final final” after that, and so on, ad infinitum.

CIA was formed in 1947

Stalin’s reign ended in 1953

The Soviet Union fell in 1991

Given the text has no date of reference it could be referring to any year between 47 and 91 and I’m doubtful the cia was producing caloric comparisons during the very first years of it’s inception, so I’m also doubtful it refers to the Stalin years.

Given the above I thought I’ll check the date of the source document.

What do you know? The text is from a document dated 1983.

The meme is shit.

Unlike other chat services Telegram has a “social” aspect and search capabilities for locating public discussion channels.

Furthermore E2EE is optional and most people don’t turn it on and is certainly not on in public channels.

While techies are freaking out about an attack on encryption the articles I’ve read so far don’t mention anything about encryption or otherwise it seems that French police is concerned about moderation or attempts at moderation of those public channels, that Telegram specifically refuses to moderate.

Perhaps this will be an attack on encryption by stealth but at this point that’s not what it looks like.

As a personal anecdote when I installed Telegram a few years ago and searched for my city’s name the top 20 results where channels offering to sell you heroin - which I thought was so blatant as to be certain it was police sting operations - but who knows.

Wouldn’t the next question be “if he’s unable to process or notice that a single simple caption under the image exists, how could he be trusted to process information pertinent to running a nation?”

By making him sound like an insane conspiracy theorist instead? Nah. He could have given a plausible answer like “it wasn’t going far enough” which would have been sufficient.

It was directly targeted to the people were supporting Nikki Haley and the very few principled republicans left. “You don’t have to support this disgusting man just because you’re Republican. These famous republicans don’t”. It was a smart move to gather extra support.

A convicted rapist literally claimed that you’re allowed to murder babies - then we put them side by side and double check if Harris said something that was slightly exaggerated. What’s so weird about it?

If Harris made such a serious departure from reality as to claim that you’re allowed to murder live children it would be front page news for 6 months and be talked about for decades.