Kevin Allred is one of those SJW bandwagon nutjobs. He's a self-described queer feminist who, despite being white himself, believes ‘There are no good white people … only less bad white people’. He works in Rutger's Women's and Gender Studies Department, teaching a course which uses Beyoncé's career as a way to explore American race, gender and sexual politics. So he probably does merit a psych. evaluation (just not on account of his idiotic tweets).
Firstly, wailing about fake news stories on Facebook is a red herring. It's one of the lame excuses the Dems are touting, rather than admit that the fault lay with their candidate. That said, there are a lot of gullible people who can't sort fact from fantasy. Two years ago, Facebook was experimenting with a 'satire' tag because some folks thought the Onion was a legit. news site. (I do wonder: if a person is unable to recognise satire, will they understand the concept any better just because it's labelled 'satire'?)
Really?? Aw, c'mon, quit pulling my leg.
Can we therefore safely assume that:
(a) there was something iffy about which law firm was hired and why?
(b) taxpayers would, if they knew the cost, not like having to pay it?
What is the likelihood of spectators/supporters of a European football club assuming that a small, local, American firm (indeed, one unknown to the rest of the USA) was sponsoring aforesaid football club? Nah, doesn't fly. Perhaps the administration of Arsenal Park, USA, should weigh in here?
OK, we knew it was bad. But *this* bad?
I'm rather sceptical about that claim of "high quality newspaper content". I think online sources (not all of them, of course!) nowadays provide the higher quality content.
You may not care, but not everyone is an ostrich. A lot of people living in the UK are concerned about this. As are many people living elsewhere in the EU. Heck, we even care about the outcome of the USA Presidential election. And things like TTIP. Infernal busybodies, that's us.
I really am getting tired of being told to "Think of the Children". When did any of them give a thought to me?
How is the Moroccan government going to stop people from "accidentally" leaving behind their newspaper in a café, or elsewhere? Or, indeed, accidentally (or deliberately) sharing their newspaper with friends and family? They haven't thought this through. Let me offer a few suggestions:
1. Henceforth, purchase of any newspaper requires production of ID.
2. Aforesaid newspaper must then be imprinted with the purchaser's fingerprint.
3. Anyone found carrying/using a newspaper which does not bear their fingerprint is guilty of unlawful appropriation.
That should solve the problem. Or contribute to the further decline of newsprint. I'm not sure which.
"...scrap this whole America thing and try to start something new from scratch."
The current travesty, once consigned to the past, could be referred to as Waserica? As for its reincarnation, my first thought was 'Numerica'. But that name's already taken. (Can't start out mired in trademark disputes!) Maybe Protomerica, as an homage to what the founding fathers had intended?
And we've always been at war with Waserica.
Microsoft, Google, et al. get together to lobby furiously against whatever hair-brained ruling the EU comes up with....
I accept that this could simply be opportunism on Microsoft's part. On the other hand, might it be an indication that the issuance of National Security Letters is soaring to ludicrous proportions? I think it behoves us (using all the metaphors) to not pump this baby canary out of the coalmine with the water....
Is it just Wikipedia/media that is being taken to task? What about all the tourism sites that include photos as an inducement to visit the country: architecture; sculpture and other public art; museum exhibits; parks and gardens; landscapes; food, etc.? And has anyone told the Swedish Public Art Agency? I do hope their database conforms to the ruling.
How did things get this bad? You can be put on the 'suspicious' list without any prior notification. The first thing you know about it is being detained for extra screening at the airport or, even worse, being prevented from flying (thus wasting the cost of your ticket -- but that's your problem not theirs). And, once labelled, there is scant chance of redress. The last time I looked, there was only a handful of people who had managed to get themselves off the blacklist, after years of fighting.
Sure, Tor is available to wrongdoers. However, it is also used by very many people around the world who -- for perfectly legitimate reasons -- wish/need to keep their communications private. And, in turn, they rely upon the public-spirited citizens who host the nodes. This latest event is symptomatic of the US attack on the Tor network itself, and there will be more to come.
So people twigged that the MSM was thinly-veiled propaganda, stopped believing it, and looked elsewhere for news sources? And, having found Internet alternatives, assumed the output therefrom would be truthful? The preferred sources may've changed -- but the gullibility of the readers has not!
I wonder how Rep. Speier pronounces her name? I hope it's 'spyer' - that would be classic nominative determinism.
What a let down. Any offers for 24 unopened packets of popcorn?
Follow the .... what?
The usual answer is 'money', but there doesn't seem to be much of that. So why are some big names still supporting Theranos? Wouldn't any sane person have fled long ago in order to salvage their integrity? Maybe the answer is cherchez la femme? Ms Holmes must be one helluva smooth operator.