WDSmart

No, I didn't "miss the point." The reason someone provides for their "loved ones" before they die is to make them feel better now. After they die, nothing matters because death is the end of everything.

Death is the end of everything. Believing others exist after your death is just another delusion, probably given to you by some religion. There is no life for you after death, nor for anyone else. Everything ends.

Not for those left behind When you die, there is nothing, no one, the end of everything.

I'll be 80 in 3 months, and as far as death is concerned, I ask, what is there to talk about? Are you asking how to prepare for death, because death itself is the end of everything.

Assuming Robinson did shoot Kirk, as all the reports indicate, I think the most likely explanation is that he did so because of his romantic relationship with his roommate, who was trans.

Not everywhere in Europe! It is everywhere in the USA...

Although the article rightfully states that the Frenchman had the right-of-way on the zebra crossing, if an oncoming car honks at you or flashes its lights, it's best to stop, back up, and let it pass. And, of course, this should be done without slapping the car as it goes by. That's what I would do, anyway,,,

Good for him! If he was going to be slaughtered, IMO, he had every right to kill every human he could.

I don't carry my passport around with me everywhere I go. I would take it on a trip like the one you have described. What I do have, however, are photos of all my IDs (passport, pink card, driver's licence, etc.) on my phone. I've never been asked for my passport, but if I were, I'd show them the photo (the first page with my photo and other information). If that isn't satisfactory to them, I think they would at least give me time to obtain my passport and return to show it to them.

Good! I hope actions like this will make Israel think twice about decimating Gaza, reach an agreement on a Two-State Solution, which includes the immediate return of all hostages - but I don't think it will.🥺

and you one old demented out of touch, wish I could continue but I don't need to be suspended - 555 Yeah, okay. Is that what your religion teaches you, to insult people? 🤨

If you're so horrified what are you actually doing about it? Other than living in another country while screaming about socialism. I moved to Thailand over 20 years ago. Then, there were not these types of activities going on in our government, or at least not as many as there are now. What am I doing about my worries about the USA now? I'm living in Thailand; I'm screaming about the growth of fascism in the US government on social media (like these forums), and I vote in the presidential elections. And, yes, I do advocate a transition from our (USA's) economy, which is now a mix of capitalism and socialism, to a higher percentage of socialism.

My statements accusing Kirk of misogyny had nothing to do with his wife. I had never heard of Kirk or his wife until he was assassinated. Since then, I've read a lot about him on social media, seen videos of his debates with college students, but the only thing I saw about his wife was a video of her speaking about his death and declaring she would continue his work. My judgments about Kirk being a misogynist (and a racist and ant-abortion, anti-LBGTQ, anti-trans, and, just today, anti-Islam) have come from social media (mainly Facebook) and CNN,

No, just because you read something on social media doesn't make it true, but it doesn't make it false either. Also, I've heard Trump, or at least his staff, threatened the networks on CNN.

There are many online posts that point to this. How about this one from a former president? "Former President Barack Obama wrote in a social media post on Thursday that the current administration had reached a “new and dangerous level by routinely threatening regulatory action against media companies unless they muzzle or fire reporters and commentators it doesn’t like” — and that media companies needed to stand up to the “government coercion” rather than capitulate to it." PBS News

First of all, Trump threatening a broadcast company with revocation of their license unless they remove one of their staff members or an entire program is, regrettably, not against the law. So, when CNN reported on the details of that, they did not use the term "alleged," as far as I remember. Secondly, I am stating what I've said here about Trump as facts. I obviously didn't participate in the talks, so I have to take someone else's word on what happened as true. CNN didn't even participate in these talks, so they are relying on someone else's account of what happened. But, that's their job, and I believe what they are reporting, as I've said above. Do you believe Trump didn't threaten ABC? If so, why?

Well, if you're talking about a crime, in my experience, CNN would always describe the person as the "alleged" perpetrator until they were given a guilty verdict in a court of law. But if you're talking about claiming someone did something or said something, yes, I'd believe CNN. I believe they would broadcast an update if what they aired turned out to be wrong. I live in Thailand. The only sources of news I have about the USA are the Internet and TV. I don't rely heavily on social media or the Internet, but I do rely on CNN.

Yes, articles on social media are not necessarily true, but if they are posted by reputable sources, such as CNN, then you can believe them until they are proven false.

They are evident to me.

How so? Actions that are taken that ignore someone's rights infringe on those rights.

I've read that everywhere on social media. Why do you think he wasn't?

Do you think the amount of a person's wealth can excuse ignoring/infringing upon their 1st Amendment Rights?

Ignoring them is infringing on them.

Cancel culture biting them on the arse And would you say that, whatever the reason, it's okay their 1st Amendment Rights were ignored?

Jimmy Kimmel is the latest one...