But they wont refuse, Its—you know—because of the implication
Saudi Arabia is the original D.E.N.N.I.S system; basically the desert version of get em on a boat out in the middle of nowhere and watch them panties unable to refuse to drop...
he might personally lose…
His head or the integrity of his rectal wall. It would be amazing if conservatives worldwide were forced to watch Putin being slowly ritually impaled with shushes for the his sputtering and having Pussy Riot play Girls just Wanna have Fun or something but medical science was used to help keep him alive.
They dont rlly care, do Ü?
She knows where the wind is blowing politicially. My suspicion is either they arent offering her anything or she doesnt want to negatively affect the orthodox democrat candidate they are pulling for.
Theres a very real chance people like Schumer and Jeffries and other DINOs are becoming (if they havent already) politically undesirable to the point their endorsements are more like a kiss of death. This lady seems like she at least acknowledged shits changing and the tradional limosine liberal bullshit has reached its expiry date
She said she’ll support the winner so theres that
Its legal because the system suborns it
Always Japan
The worst part is if they got the gender and age wrong for the paradise virgins. Turns out its only guys and old men who underwent suicide missions. Both virgins too
Even the Afterlife is subject yo the juisdiction of Supply and Demand
How so? Its arguably the only thing many can do, news is for investors
Additional scary facts
Like it or not, diplomacy is necessary
Ofc they paywall this particular article
Why would he litigate it, he was pardoned. 0 incentive to put himself into more public scrutiny
On the subject of improving the (legal) system, if it doesnt affect the employers equally or moreso I’ve found, it really doesnt matter what is done or not done. They somehow always escape the discussion unmolested
At some point, if nobody is cool with footing the bill, it raises an exponentially larger question of why is there a bill in the first place, who made the order underlying it, and why the subscription should continue or ever even existed before these pesky underwriting decisions were supposed to and failed to be made writ large
That needs to be explored. Is it ever ok to dispute that bill and send it back + refuse to continue until the order is made right?
Can I ask you a genuinely heartfelt and good-faith question?
How is it fair when someone shitty is allowed entry who ends up hurting civilians but civilians are expected to suck it up
How do you actually fix that without acting prophalactically, even its seen to be unfair or prematuew?
As far as I’m aware theres already an enormous issue on that side of things
Not a fan of capriciousness but if criminal issues cant even be dealt with, maybe thats a necessary step in the evolution of a workable larger system.
However, all these things should equally or allocate sufficient joint liabillity to the employers. If you feel the need to infringe on guest’s rights, that discussion is arguably inseperable from and should be understood to be complete or even appropriate without bringingthe sponsor to the table.
They are often the root of any local or global problems in this domain and its a true tradgedy that they shirk accountabillity to their underlings/hires when they are oxygen to the flame
Fair but Necessary
What is this from?
The credit system basically IS the Social Credit System