Even if you are going the speed limit? Weird. So you have to take your eyes off the road to count cars behind you?
Hopefully you have a rear view mirror. My understanding is that a driver is supposed to be aware of traffic 360 degrees around their vehicle.
The law applies to bicycles too.
Also yes, even if you are going the speed limit.
1 Like
Drivers are not deputy sheriffs, all drivers have a duty to avoid collisions (regardless of “right of way”), and psychological management of surrounding traffic is an essential part of driving skill.
Frustrated drivers tend to do reckless and dangerous things, which creates a greater hazard than a minor speed infringement. If someone is recklessly tailgating and there is no chance to safely pull over; sure, slow down until the situation becomes safe, even if that pisses 'em off. But if you can resolve the situation by letting them pass, do it. Temporary satisfaction isn’t worth risking a potentially fatal collision.
3 Likes
How many of the posts in this thread are about driving? Come on, guys.
7 Likes
Sorry. I blame Trump fatigue.
3 Likes
Hate to break it to you, but as a minority myself (or at least half of me is, but that seems enough for everyone I’ve ever met), I can tell you that you’re already “othered” in everybody else’s minds.
And yeah, the only people who don’t really seem to have a color are a really pale people who don’t have any yellow or red or brown (and even then they usually seem pretty pink…).
But if it’s not color, it’s going to be something else. People are fundamentally petty tribal animals. The evolved state is acceptance of diversity…
8 Likes
You’ve got a point; mea culpa.
4 Likes
We could make our own Trump presidential library. Assuming this pig excuse me President-Elect takes office, some day he’ll have a presidential library, and you know what it’ll be full of? BS, that’s what. It’ll be a manufactured narrative full of appropriated words with reconstructed meanings, a retelling and a respinning, a theft of narrative, a monument of lies. Instead, we make our own, telling the truth as we know it. Make it a virtual tour that people can walk through, a fully interactive architectural rendering, and the exhibits inside tell the story as we know it.
We may not be able to help whether there’s a portrait of His Hairness hanging in the White House some day, but we don’t have to lose the whole story.
4 Likes
this is not correct, the Kosovo war included an enforced no-fly zone over Yugoslavia, declared unilaterally by the NATO
and while the NATO is an organisation with multiple member states it was a conflict party and could not create a “consensus” defined under the current rules of international law
1 Like
The no-fly zone over Bosnia and Herzegovina was declared by the UN Security Council (Resolutions 781 and 816). NATO was the enforcement mechanism.
I am talking about the Kosovo war (operation “Allied Force”), not the Bosnian war half a decade earlier.
That was a bombing campaign and not the establishment of a no-fly zone (Bosnia-Herzegovina is the better example of the latter).
you are playing with words, one requirement for bombings is air supremacy, implying that no one else is flying around.
the bombing campaign started to force the Yugoslavian government to accept the “Military Technical Agreement” written by the NATO, including a no-fly zone in and around the Kosovo.
No, I’m not playing with words, since these terms mean different things in the contexts of diplomacy, international law, and rules of engagement (and @Bolt_Bolter’s comment to which I responded). But if you want to believe that “no-fly zone” = “bombing campaign” (or fighter support for one) be my guest.
I have a Facebook group on yoga and this week I spoke about the concept of satyagraha. It was coined by Gandhi and it means “holding to truth.” It means that you hold to your own truth with the goal of creating unity. I believe that our political process has divided us. There are some who overtly hold hate in their hearts, but there are many Trump supporters who do not recognize the unconscious biases they hold that he appealed to. They don’t have swastikas carved on their arms so they don’t understand how you can call them racists. They may have lady parts themselves so they don’t understand how you can call them sexist. We need to educate and we need to stand firm in opposition.
http://mettacenter.org/nonviolence/satyagraha/
The best example of satyagraha is Rosa Parks, who calmly and clearly stood up to hate with her truth.
One of the things I’ve come to understand, too, is that when we talk of “rights” it is too vague. The reason people want rights is because their physical safety and financial wellbeing is harmed without legal protection. One thing I had not understood about the Montgomery Bus Boycott until I visited the Rosa Parks museum is that the black women were regularly beaten and raped on the buses by the drivers. Boy, that sure gives her action a whole other dimension, doesn’t it? So, I think we have to make sure that when we talk about immigrant rights or the rights of women we are making it clear that our lives and our livelihood are at stake, not just some vague legal idea that makes us feel good.
5 Likes
Part of me thinks we need to push his crap forward. Make the next four years a total shit show so this sort of presidency is remembered.
Making things better will only be attributed to Trump.
Is there anyone who knows of a website where one can find where the protests are going?
4 Likes
imo you are arguing semantics but I withdraw my example, it’s not as if this was the only one not based on a security council resolution: The US, with UK and France, proclaimed no-fly zones in Iraq, 1991.
The asserted legal basis was resolution 688, which did not say anything about the ban of military flights*. The idea is not my own, Boutros-Ghali, then Secretary-General, also said that the UN gave no permission for a NFZ.
* this was the phrasing used in resolution 781
I would agree that the Coalition’s asserted legal basis in the case of its unilateral Iraq no-fly zones in 1991 was a dodgy one. But I would argue that there was also a de facto international consensus to allow them to proceed in order to protect the Kurds and Shiites, with Resolution 688 being used as a convenient though tenuous pretext. No-one was shedding tears for Saddam, and while China and Russia grumbled a bit about the no-fly zone for larger geopolitical purposes they did nothing to actually stop it.
There would be no similar effective international consensus in the current Syrian civil war, which is why a discussion of no-fly zones (UN-sanctioned or otherwise) is a non-starter in that context. Instead, Russia and the U.S. are conducting their own bombing and air strike campaigns against groups opposed to The Chinless Wonder (including what is effectively a shared campaign against Daesh) with very loose co-ordination and notification.
Yeah, but nobody will know WHY you are doing it.
I suggest getting some bumper stickers printed up: “Speed Limit Monitors Against Trump”
This will make it clear that you are acting on behalf of equality and dignity, rather than just being a d-bag.
1 Like
