My opinion (shared by independent observers of journalism and propaganda) of Bloomberg had nothing to do with this story. Bloomberg is propaganda. Like RT, they include unslanted stories along with their worked stories. That’s just how propaganda works.

Did you say this with the flesh of young, vulnerable individuals still stuck in your teeth?

Which is exactly as I expected. I was trying to reassure the parent commenter that [regarding the punishment] things are proceeding just as the MPs wished for things to happen; that the punishment is being drawn intentionally and is something to be celebrated by their supporters; and I suppose that condemning Parliament for applying it is performative.

Okay but what you are talking about is civil disobedience.

Civil disobedience is the nonviolent, conscious, and public refusal to obey certain laws, demands, or commands of a government or occupying power, usually as a form of protest. A key aspect is that the person accepts the legal consequences of their actions to highlight the perceived injustice of the law or policy they are opposing.

Prominent examples include:

• Mahatma Gandhi’s Salt March (against British colonial salt laws)

• Martin Luther King Jr. and the U.S. Civil Rights Movement

• Thoreau’s refusal to pay the poll tax, which he described in Civil Disobedience

The acceptance of punishment is what often distinguishes civil disobedience from other forms of lawbreaking.

Zombie YouTube is so heartbreaking. It was the coolest thing around ten years ago.

Bloomberg isn’t real news. It’s on par with RT News.

They are mad because when they were children, their daddy was mad at Trudeau.

According to political theory, the police are the manifestation of the state’s so-called monopoly on violence. The police exist specifically to do violence to citizens of a state. Is the state wrong? Are the police wrong? There’s no wrong answer, but there can be inconsistent ones.

The only possible responses to immediately present violence are surrender or greater violence. You cannot judge someone who chooses to respond to violence with violence – or who finds their bodies have chosen for them.

Every generation of Americans decide they want their President to be a bit more like the king that they rebelled from.

Needlessly speciesist but it’s a good start

I don’t even have to click through to know that’s bullshit

Honestly, decent people are so rare, one cannot afford to be fussy about appearance. Fortunately, ethical compatibility is VERY attractive.

Let me answer your question with a question; why isn’t the final frame a mix of sheep and wolves?

I read that somewhere. What can you do, it’s in our DNA.

ok but they’re still wearing murdered lambs; their nature hasn’t changed, they just appropriated culture from their victims.

Appearance is never a sufficient factor on its own, but in my own case appearance, I wouldn’t consider it a disqualifying factor. Though me a few years ago wouldn’t have to try as hard, for sure…

Are there cases where a member state refuses to do so?

This is why you can’t let your rats play in the back yard. :-(

Can be taken from his wages, if he has any.

It’s interesting to note that the man apparently did nothing criminal. This is a civil matter between him and the library, as though the library were a car mechanic or a dentist that he reneged on an agreement with.

I feel like someplace else might have recognized what I think can fairly be called hate speech, destruction of the commons, and terroristic intent (on a very small scale – destruction of the commons specifically for political effect). Certainly he’s not morally superior to someone who throws soup on a painting or glues themselves to the road for climate activism. I think such activists frequently catch pretty grand charges.