It's On The Linked Page, But The Text Below The Cut Is Different From The Linked Page.

Been thinking a bit on the controversies around harry potter's author, since I read a bit of fanfic, and, well - in recent years, I have to come to the opinion that the best possible way to get at someone is to turn their own work against them.

And, well, like, besides which, while don't give her more money of course, its clear that the supposed political stratagem of telling folk to never engage her works is pure foolishness.

(And its not like American schools actually teach critical thinking anymore; I may of dropped out of high school, but it was in what's generally called a "middle upper class" neighborhood, which I have since come to learn means working upper class, so from what I hear, that's more than most are getting, and I didn't get any critical thinking in that time.)

Back to the point of writing this - and I know its possible I just missed this happening - why not call her by the least traceable name of the main villain? Ya know, you know who. Don't hyphenate it or anything, I don't even recommend capitalization - in fact, if its not clear that she's the one your talking about without reading a sentence or two around it, the best analytics *these* days won't be able to filter it out from the (admittedly few, so it may be for the best to use those more often too) other uses of you know who.

Baptized in bin juice. Ringed in trash fire! The Gobling Sage

Having of seen the comment about 52% from more neutral sources, that sounds unreasonable based on the light pollution in Pyongyang, assuming that 100% of China's people have electricity.

Although it is to my awareness that at the least, environmentalism is a historical socialist secondary goal, so it would make sense that the socialist/communist countries would have less light pollution, so a light pollution comparison of NK vs SK is simply going to be wrong.

However, it is fair to compare NK and China. Obviously Wikipedia's main 2020 Dandong stats don't directly compare to Pyongyang's 2008 stats. However, a 2005 Dandong stat is seen on Wikipedia too; from this, I find it reasonable to conclude that Pyongyang is thrice as large as Dandong. Now, if I read the Wikipedia page right, Dandong is Both of those slightly larger than Pyongyang lights near the coast on North Korea's north-west border.

Therefore, I conclude that, if anything, the CIA's 26% statement is likely an overestimate; it's more likely something just under 16%, instead. Assuming China's population all has electricity, of course.

thank you wikipedia that seems like a very unbiased and reliable source

What about the safety laws created by incompetents to fix problems that don’t exist?

What if they’re created by corrupt officials to destroy competition? Or to get kickbacks to the officials?

In fact, RSC is just assuming regulations would’ve saved the sub, because regulations good™. 

and beyond (follow us for more of these)

im the bravest ever

You know, at some point this is gonna become a movie that you can actually like see in theaters and shit. And, like, when that happens, I say that the profits should go to Tumblr.

You see it, don’t you? 

You’ve become a monster too.

what if that one iconic backstory scene in goncharov (1973) after he makes his first kill but as a movie poster

Mob Psycho 100 II OP