Ok but beyond the existence of “propaganda”, what are you fighting for in this case by towing this line? What message is the “propaganda” trying to convey that you disagree with?

The neighbors fact is historically relevant, Jews have been living on that land for thousands of years https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_diaspora

You’re right. There’s zero Jewish representation in the Arab world while Arabs make up about 20% of the Israeli population (and hold positions of power within the country). Israel is a tolerant society while saud, Qatar, etc. are largely intolerant of Jewish existence (they genocided their own Jewish populations).

Terrorism is violence towards people, riots are violence towards property, that’s a hell of a leap to try to equivocate the two

By definition, if the business venture isn’t profitable, then there isn’t a market.

REI in downtown Portland pulled out and publicly said it was because of rising crime, but it was really because the employees were trying to unionize.

Effective protests are disruptive.

It’s an extremely weak argument for this very reason

Most metal parts testing is destructive. I.e., once you test the parts, they are destroyed and you can’t use them anymore. That’s why the trust I certificates is so important. They certify that metal from the same batch passed those tests. That’s why it’s a huge safety risk if the certs are fake, there’s no guarantee that the metal can meet the requirements, and no way to test without breaking the parts.

Sure…and if you were the 18 wheeler, you would give the proper stopping distance to the car in front of you, but it would be up to the person behind you to make sure they give you the same birth from behind. If they are on your (the 18 wheelers) ass, they would be causing traffic.

This isn’t meant to be a license to speed up it someone is riding your ass, it’s a rule that if EVERYONE followed, it would dramatically cut traffic jams.

By definition, if you got rid of cars, you wouldn’t have traffic. Traffic is made from cars.

Your own source says they used other filtering systems besides ALPS, which would further mitigate the risk you seem stuck on.

Parents have the option of homeschooling their kids. That’s them exercising their authority. But public school curriculum should be decided by an apolitical body that follows evidence based practices. Don’t like it as a parent? Then homeschool.

If everyone followed the one rule “keep as much space in front of me to the next car, as there is behind me to the next car, at all times” it would do the most to alleviate most traffic jams.

I find your criticism of the parts of the movie you don’t like to be super weak and unspecific. The crux of the entire movie is the juxtaposition between what’s it’s like in Barbie ruled barbie world vs ken ruled barbie world. It’s literally the lens though which the movie criticizes patriarchy.

Ken bringing patriarchy back to barbie world I don’t think was a twist, it was the clear narrative arc from the moment ken fell in love with patriarchy.

Matell being villains is a clear misreading of the plot from your point of view. Matell is the butt of the joke the entirety of the film. They don’t drive the plot, and were never in control of anything that happens. Why would you expect them to become the villains? That’s your own internal biases leaking (and maybe putting too much of Mugatu onto will Farrell)

Lastly, in much the same way that the opening of barbie is an homage to 2001 a space Odyssey, (that scene they are parodying specifically in the original movie is about the death of old paradigms and the beginning of new ones), the beach battle is an homage to patriarchally driven war media, specifically D-Day scenes such as from saving private Ryan. It’s the death of patriarchy subverted through a traditionally patriarchal approach.