![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/596527af-2fd9-4572-bf2a-d19887912f22.jpeg)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/c47230a8-134c-4dc9-89e8-75c6ea875d36.png)
but also fuck destroying knowledge in the name of war…
That’s why War sucks, and Humanity should never fight them.
but also fuck destroying knowledge in the name of war…
That’s why War sucks, and Humanity should never fight them.
What always gets me is when they stick their paw underneath the closed door, swiping their arm around like they are trying to grab something, to get you to play with them while you’re in the middle of doing your business.
oh my gosh my heart wants to explode they’re so CUTE!
I believe it’s just one cat, though if it was twins looking like that that would be extra credit fantastic.
As a child I literally learned about prejudice from that Star Trek episode.
Accidental? Do better, Russia. America hits its targets.
From the article…
A lawsuit in federal court found that the city used excessive force and violated constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure.[5]
I wonder what Russia’s court system will do?
How so? Honestly asking.
The thing with terrorism is the moment you show weakness they will keep exploiting that and repeating what works.
True, but how you show strength to counter that matters, especially to the civilians caught in the middle.
An army should go around civilians to get to their enemy, not through them.
can think of both sides as good guys and bad guys.
One country invaded another country without (real) cause. That seems pretty clear-cut.
/whoosh
Unpopular opinion, but I detest word art.
‘Detest’ is a word, a word that is being used, um… strongly. Could it perhaps be being used, overly so?
I don’t think those buildings were built to withstand an airplane, at least not the one they were hit by.
From what I saw on a show that covered that a long time ago, they were, but not for the larger planes that we have today, but the ones that flew back in the 70’s.
I meant contradictory to the origional comment I was replying to, that was talking about alt reasons for the tragedy. Replied to the wrong comment.
Well, here’s what 5 minutes of research yielded
The problem is, I read contradictory information, so both sides say they’re correct…
For example, this…
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800 to 1500 degrees Fahrenheit, not hot enough to melt steel (2750 degrees Fahrenheit). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn’t need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength—and that required exposure to much less heat.
That’s my understanding as well.
And that the fire retardant foam was designed to be hit by an airplane and stay on, but it was just designed in those days for a smaller 737 impact, and not for a heavybody plane, so it got knocked off, exposing the beams.
Edit: Lol, ok, meant beams, not beans.
Ah, ok. Thanks for the clarification.
Just to make sure we are on the same page, are you saying that the jet fuel burning the metal beams of the building is true, or a conspiracy?
I haven’t heard of anything to refute that, and have heard things to confirm that.
If you have any info you’d like to submit, please do so.
Edit: By refute that, I mean refuting that the jet fuel burning caused the metal to weaken onto collapse.
Jet fuel can’t blow up steel beams! Wake up sheeple!
Wasn’t that the reason though that the Twin Towers in NY fell, because the jet fuel melted the steel beams infrastructure?
I had read/seen that the buildings were actually designed to handle a plane crashing into them, but the architects didn’t expect the metal beams to melt from the high-temperature burning jet fuel.
Just for the record, the cat actually knows you’re playing, right? 😋
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)