To their credit, Reddit is mostly not siding with the attackers.
One comment nails it:
Media be like: "It was a mostly peaceful assault"
Notwithstanding the intent, this may not work well in practice. This law could be used to purge wrongthinkers and conservatives from academia so it becomes even more of an echo chamber.
Power will be vested in this board of trustees, but what protects it from being compromised? DeSantis barely won in 2018; the next governor may be in the mold of Andrew Gillum.
These aren't mainstream black leaders. CCA is an upstart project of DaQuawn Bruce, who interned for black Republican senator Tim Scott. They're part of the small minority of black conservative activists.
"an anonymous hate account"
It's not Yahoo, it's the L.A. Times. "Yahoo News" consists almost entirely of copies of articles from other sources.
And the L.A. Times sees racism in every grain of sand.
She was CEO of Reddit for 8 months. Her NPC views should not be seen as important to anything.
The working theory is that Reddit wanted censorship, so they used a known controversial, rightfully despised figure as a scapegoat while they made the desired policy changes, then dumped her when it was done.
Original for those who missed it.
There was literally a movie about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_(1969_film)
Of course.
The first two are definitely bad. The third is only saying it could be worse, and the fourth says they deserve to be punished, though it's not clear they mean they deserve this punishment. Anyway, you're right that I missed them; I initially read only a couple of dozen comments.
The first one is not endorsement just hope for leniency. The other two are pretty bad, and, sure, some commenters could be said to be championing it, but they are a minority.
Okay, I read through a bunch of the comments. While several Redditors said the violence against POWs was understandable, nearly all agreed it was wrong, and I didn't see anyone championing it.
Her explanation: she meant the UN.
There's absolutely no way that's not satire.
The 911 call was spliced together to imply Zimmerman targeted him for being black and wearing a hoodie: https://youtu.be/Xf_AtDnVhyA
The Trayvon Martin case was really the launching point of mass media's campaign of misrepresentation of facts to manufacture racial narratives. Fake racial accusations, to be sure, have a long pedigree, but that's when it became a weapon of mass deception. From there it's a straight line to the events of 2020 and beyond, where "racism" is now routinely imputed anytime a black person is harmed, with no evidence needed.
The "stand your ground" law is one of the most absurd aspects of it. Zimmerman claimed he was pinned to the ground (and witnesses confirm this), so flight was not an option. The law had no relevance at all to the case. It is testament to the media's ability to craft a false narrative that the idea of stand your ground has nevertheless become associated indelibly with this case.
This screenshot has gone viral but is misleading.
Here's the actual webpage: https://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2022/2022-02-15-x1/html/sor-dors21-eng.html
This subsection (2) exemption is part of section 3, foreign nationals. It's not part of section 2, public assembly, as the screenshot wrongly implies.
In practice, it's about keeping Americans out of the protest.
Thanks. I always forget to do this.
Also, a lot of "trending" hashtags are those that Twitter staff wants to promote.
No, only 17. The mansion incident occurred in April 2001, four months before Giuffre's 18th birthday.
So, this language of "child sex abuse" and "pedophilia" is pretty ridiculous. The age of consent is 18 in NY, so it was illegal, but it's 16 in many states, so clearly opinions differ.
This "civic norm" is only a few years old. It has long been unacceptable to call a black person a nigger, but the current "rule" that you can't say the word at all, which is all Rogan did, is new and intended to elevate the status of blacks even higher, to make it crystal clear what the racial hierarchy is.
It's no coincidence that this development is concomitant with the emerging legal standard that whites may not defend themselves from black criminals, and will be prosecuted twice (state & federal) if they dare to.
Obligatory: Louis C. K. on "the N-word" (2008)
I'll give this document credit for comments such as this:
Critics dismiss white working-class concerns of immigration and the migration of manufacturing jobs to developing countries as racism. Racism certainly exists in the United States but to completely dismiss this entire group of people as racist is incorrect. To accept racism as the source of white working-class concerns ignores more than 70 years of significant strides to reduce racism in the United States. Additionally, labeling the white working class as racist only encourages more alienation as it ignores legitimate grievances of economic insecurity and declining communities.
At least they're not falling into woke idiocy. Also, they admit that
white males were disproportionately represented in killed in action (KIA) numbers for Iraq.
How is "trying harder to get people with differing opinions on" bending the knee? That means allowing all sides to be heard, which is what free speech is for.
Or is it doing his "best to make sure I’ve researched these topics"? Because that's barely saying anything.
Risky click.