JacksonLamb

joined 9 months ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] JacksonLamb 6 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

I suppose it's for people who feel like they are not ingesting enough microplastics.

[–] JacksonLamb 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I find it hard to believe that a $2 "fabric softener" smells all that good? Pretty sure it smells like cheap chemical fragrances.

[–] JacksonLamb 1 points 10 hours ago

Exactly.

It's also applied to creativity a lot. Tall poppy syndrome can take the form of shitting on anyone who wants to do something different.

[–] JacksonLamb 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Nothing I said was about you. Why would I "call you out"?

This isn't fight club it's the fediverse. You need to chill.

[–] JacksonLamb 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (3 children)

I didn't think you intended it as such, and am not "accusing" you of anything.

I was simply making an observational comment about how that word is commonly used in the west. You yourself said it's not the best word.

Plenty of vernacular expressions have their roots in racism and other inequality, and are used by media to support heirarchies and disguise inequality.

It doesn't hurt to be mindful of that or to question our unwitting reinforcement of these ideas. For example a few years ago we saw UK "expats" voting for brexit to keep out "migrants". A little more mindfulness might have meant a little less voting for leopards to eat faces.

[–] JacksonLamb 0 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

"Expat" is what people from wealthy countries use because applying terms like "migrant" to themselves make them feel uncomfortable.

It's a subtle form of racism / classism.

[–] JacksonLamb 0 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm very curious about what you would like to see happen.

Do you want to deport all black people to Africa and all white people to Europe, or are you presuming that Indigenous would freely decide to host all of you on their land indefinitely?

[–] JacksonLamb 2 points 21 hours ago

Amphetamines.

During the last election he went on a big ramble about how Biden is probably on amphetamines for stamina. Sounded like he was telling on himself.

[–] JacksonLamb 4 points 21 hours ago

Musk is already occupying that position.

[–] JacksonLamb 4 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

So in other words Tall Poppy is just Crab Bucket that can't admit to themselves what they are doing.

"We want you to stay down in the bucket with us for egalitarianism!"

[–] JacksonLamb 4 points 22 hours ago

I don't think it ever went out of fashion unfortunately.

[–] JacksonLamb 40 points 23 hours ago

It's 2025, the teenagers mostly document their lives on social media. Tent life guy from Gaza got killed but there are others.

When this empire falls and the genocide history is able to be taught then yes I think some of these video records will be studied by children around the world.

 

A U.S. jury in Miami has ruled that Chiquita Brands International is liable for financing the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), a paramilitary death squad designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. during Colombia's civil war.

This decision comes after 17 years of legal proceedings and a previous conviction in 2007 when Chiquita was fined $25 million for illegal payments to the AUC. The recent verdict marks the first time an American jury has held a major U.S. corporation accountable for complicity in human rights abuses in another country, newsletter Pirate Wire Services explained.

Plaintiffs represented by Earth Rights International, an NGO advocating for corporate responsibility, have long sought justice through courts in both Colombia and the United States regarding this issue. The jury in Miami recommended a civil fine of $2 million for each family member filing suit, following two "bellwether cases" selected from over a hundred filed by victims.

Court documents reveal that Chiquita paid 3 cents per dollar for each box of bananas exported from Colombia to the AUC, an organization responsible for thousands of civilian deaths, including the eradication of entire villages, the murders of trade union representatives and rivals, and the kidnapping of politicians. Victims and their families had lobbied for years to sue Chiquita in civil courts, efforts that the company delayed through various legal tactics.

In addition to the payments, victims and ex-AUC commanders claim that Chiquita provided weapons and gasoline to the paramilitary forces in the Urabá region of Colombia. They argue that Chiquita executives knew these resources were being used to kill civilians and suppress unions near their operations. Chiquita has denied these accusations, maintaining that the payments were extortion made under duress, an argument previously rejected by U.S. courts.

Chiquita attempted to move all civil cases to Colombian courts, but its motion was denied, and the cases proceeded in the U.S. In 2018, Colombia's Prosecutor's Office formally accused Chiquita executives of aggravated conspiracy to commit a crime and attempting to hide these payments as "security payments." The investigation was suspended in 2019 but may resume under Colombia's new lead prosecutor, Luz Adriana Camargo Garzón, who has expressed interest in the case.

The Colombian Peace Court has characterized Chiquita's actions, including labor union repression, as "crimes against humanity."

 

A U.S. jury in Miami has ruled that Chiquita Brands International is liable for financing the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), a paramilitary death squad designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. during Colombia's civil war.

This decision comes after 17 years of legal proceedings and a previous conviction in 2007 when Chiquita was fined $25 million for illegal payments to the AUC. The recent verdict marks the first time an American jury has held a major U.S. corporation accountable for complicity in human rights abuses in another country, newsletter Pirate Wire Services explained.

Plaintiffs represented by Earth Rights International, an NGO advocating for corporate responsibility, have long sought justice through courts in both Colombia and the United States regarding this issue. The jury in Miami recommended a civil fine of $2 million for each family member filing suit, following two "bellwether cases" selected from over a hundred filed by victims.

Court documents reveal that Chiquita paid 3 cents per dollar for each box of bananas exported from Colombia to the AUC, an organization responsible for thousands of civilian deaths, including the eradication of entire villages, the murders of trade union representatives and rivals, and the kidnapping of politicians. Victims and their families had lobbied for years to sue Chiquita in civil courts, efforts that the company delayed through various legal tactics.

In addition to the payments, victims and ex-AUC commanders claim that Chiquita provided weapons and gasoline to the paramilitary forces in the Urabá region of Colombia. They argue that Chiquita executives knew these resources were being used to kill civilians and suppress unions near their operations. Chiquita has denied these accusations, maintaining that the payments were extortion made under duress, an argument previously rejected by U.S. courts.

Chiquita attempted to move all civil cases to Colombian courts, but its motion was denied, and the cases proceeded in the U.S. In 2018, Colombia's Prosecutor's Office formally accused Chiquita executives of aggravated conspiracy to commit a crime and attempting to hide these payments as "security payments." The investigation was suspended in 2019 but may resume under Colombia's new lead prosecutor, Luz Adriana Camargo Garzón, who has expressed interest in the case.

The Colombian Peace Court has characterized Chiquita's actions, including labor union repression, as "crimes against humanity." The central issue in the U.S. civil court case was whether Chiquita's payments to the AUC materially assisted the group in its illegal actions.

view more: next ›