imagine being a teacher going into your 5th grade classroom and you ask the students what they did over the weekend and this 10 year old girl looks up at you and says oh i DM'd a dungeons and dragons game for my friends, and you say oh thats so nice, which friends? and the kid says oh my usual group, but dave couldnt come because his wife had the flu
"doesnt israel have a right to exist too??" well its an apartheid ethnostate so no
"what about the people dont the PEOPLE have a right to exist??" yes! they do! however, they do not have a right to an apartheid ethnostate
"what about the holocaust survivors in israel dont they-" yes they have a right to exist too, however surviving one genocide does not give you the right to commit another, nor does it give you the right to an apartheid ethnostate
arkomaly asked:
Hey do you know alot about internal organs. Cause if so then i have a pretty specific question.
Are... are your organs covered in blood??? Since blood tends to flow thru the blood vessels, and if your body is healthy and all your blood vessels are imtact then your organs shouldn't be covered in blood, right? But just saying that feels wrong.
hjartasalt answered:
No, unless you are actively experiencing internal bleeding then your organs are not covered in blood. They are however wet, but it’s cerebrospinal fluid and mucus that keeps them that way.
Trust me you do not want them to be in any other condition. If they were covered in blood then there would be no way for your body to effectively circulate that blood, leading you to bleed out. As for them being wet, I personally would not want to experience dry friction on my organs so I am more than okay with that
Also just to clear up any further confusion, cerebrospinal fluid (as the name implies) is contained to just your brain and spinal cord. The rest are protected by mucous
I'm a historian.
Honestly? I wish we'd had Facebook or whatever inhuman wasteland this is during WWII so Germans couldn't cower behind the "we were all seduced by that wicked sorcerer Hitler" excuse and claim there wasn't a single Nazi in the whole damn country outside of the Führer's inner circle.
It is these records that are crucial in demolishing the convenient mutually consensual fictions of collective innocence that have fueled so much impunity for atrocity's lesser agents.
ofc you can feel however you like about hamas specifically and still be unequivocally on the side of palestinian resistance but talking about hamas like it's some invasive occupying regime or some inexplicable evil terrorising palestine or even a religious hate group is both racist and completely inane. whatever your opinion on hamas, i urge everyone to actually consider the position of palestinians on the ground--if everyone you loved was killed by an airstrike while the world cheered on, who the fuck wouldn't join an organisation promising revenge and action, when the alternative is looking down at the barrel if vanishingly short life expectancy amid more airstrikes in an open air prison with a 47% unemployment rate. you might not think that hamas is good or right or correct, but you have to understand it as a response to the situation it exists in or you'll just end up uncritically accepting the islamophobic propaganda lines being used to fuel a genocide



























